BlackLightning

Yes, according to page 24 of the manual you can click on the “FLOLS” text and drag it. Maybe in that way you can move it out of the way if you don’t like it and hopefully the position remains saved for the future landings. I will try to move it around next time. Personally, I have a 1080p 22” monitor and before the Supercarrier I needed to zoom in a lot to see the ball. Just to give a reference: at that zoom level I think that the apparent dimension of the HUD on the monitor was still smaller than its actual dimension in real life. I’ve also noticed that in a case 3 tutorial video it showed up with very bad visibility caused by bad wheather; the player used it and called the ball although the meatball of the boat was not visible at all. I’m personally glad that it will become an option, according to Wags (read the quote some pages back). I’m a little undecided about whether I should use it or not. I personally would rather like to have a section of the screen with a magnified vision of the meatball from that distance, a little bit like the Magnifier tool of Windows. In that way, if it’s covered by mist, clouds or whatever, it will look that way. Talking about visibility, I don’t see the point (:lol:) of doing a Case 3 in daytime if the visibility is not awful, including the visibility of the ball if there is mist in front of it.

In the missions I tried I didn't have any ordnance loaded on the aircraft, but I did drop some F bombs when I noticed how beautiful this work is! :) It also seems playable with the F14, too, even with my low specs computer, at least so far. I will also test it at night; it looks beutiful from the videos. So thank you from me, too, ED‼

Yes, great find! The more I watch those videos, the less I can wait! Now let’s just hope that my rig can run it! :lol: BTW, I’d like to hear some comments about performance by those testers... I haven’t heard any yet.

You mean the sudden sink as it gets airborne, I think. I've noticed that too: in real World footage it doesn't sink like that.

First of all, from the videos I've seen I have to say that it really looks like a nice module, to me, and that I'm looking forward to using it. That said, since it's in Early Access, it's proper to point out some not very convincing features. Watching the video in which they attacked the carrier, I've noticed that explosives can damage the deck and the hull, whereas, when the aircraft explodes at 18:00 there is no damage to the deck.

Brilliant! I own a (cheap) telescope but only for visual and not photography. So I guess that in the "image #1 after", the aircraaft looks better while the pilot and the sea look blurry because the former has been still in the frames and the latter have moved.

+1: appreciated.

Good luck, Cobra. Sorry to read that.

Even if I write it a little late, welcome‼

@ Truegrit: I do not mean to put any pressure on you and I wish you a pleasant work with this module. Every organisation works for its customers and we are Trugrit's potential customers. They are working to satisfy us and so it sounds blatant to me that our opinions are interesting to them. For those of you who can, I suggest that you read the paragraph 5.2.1 of the ISO 9001 standard about focusing on the customer; unfortunately, since it's a commercialized standard I can't share the text here. Debates about EA are typical when a new module is released, so, instead of debating after the release, why don't we debate now that development is at beginning? If Truegrit opens a poll and makes it a sticky and keeps it open for, say, 6 months, then they could use it for their advantage: they would have collected potential customers' wishes, they could answer by saying whether they will fulfill these wishes or not and maybe why, they could even reference to it after the release in case someone complains about it, like: customer: «Truegrit, this product is too incomplete!» TG's answer: «sorry customer, but there has been a poll about this and we have just worked according to your wishes: you customers gave priority to an early release with less features» And if Trugrit doesn't want to do all this, then never mind, sometimes suggestions are not put into practice.

It’s nice that you all say your opinions, but there should be a summary of them. IMO there should be a poll like the following: Question: how complete should the module be at release? Choices: - 100%: I won’t buy early access - mostly - I can accept missing features, but the features released should be complete - I want most of the features released to a basic level, to be completed later It would be nice if TrueGrit chose the possibilities for the poll, possibly adding comments about the estimated time for each of them. Personally, I’m more oriented to the possibility with some complete features and other missing completely, up to the extent of feasibility, since some features work together. For example you cannot say that the aircraft is completely capable to land until it can use navigational features.

Thanks to ED for the update video; it feels good to see the new module in use: it looks quite good‼

I'm writing from the zone which is currently the most infected in the World: Bergamo province in Lombardy. Measures have been implemented and it seems that we are reaping what we sow: the percentual increment of infected people has become lower and lower: on 9th March it was +25% per day, then it decreased to +20%/day on the 12th, +15%/day on the 15th and +10%/day yesterday. Here, so far we still find food at the supermarkets and the provisional laws approved in order to fight the spreading of this illness prevent everybody from working apart from those workers who provide life supporting services, like the ones who make food or medical products. I doubt that we will ever reach a point in which people will fight for canned food because there is not enough for everybody. However, economy experts are starting to say that this crisis will be about as hard as the 2008 recession. I still haven't heard about anyone losing his job because of the virus but I'm worried in that regard. Here in Italy we have a tradition according to which every professional activity is closed for a couple of weeks in august and everybody goes on vacation (tipically to the seaside). We can just skip those two weeks and make foreign customers happy in august if everything goes back to normality within a couple of weeks; I just wonder whether it wil be ebough or if we will have to stay home for longer in april. Personallly, I stay home as much as I can and when I'm outside I keep the safety distance and, if I really have to pass close to someone, I hold my breath for some seconds, remembering that if I exhale I will increment the chances of infectng the others and of infecting myself if I inhale. I also tend to keep objects that have been outside in quarantine or I disinfect them. Chlorine based products like bleach are considered the best. I also remember which fingers have touched what when touching a series of objects among which some are suspicious, like door handles. Luckily, a friend of mine taught me to cough and sneeze into the bend of my forearm years ago and so it's already an habit.

@ Jonne: thank you for the recap. IMO it would be better if they wrote a warning on the Supercarrier purcase web page whereby they communicate the possibility of non compatibility with the F14 in early access. I also think that one of these threads about the compatibility with the F14 should become a sticky and be a sticky even after release if the F14 will not work with the SC from the beginning. I agree with those people who think that this issue should have top priority among the others.

Matteo from Northern Italy here. Thank you for your words. I find it quite cool that a priest plays DCS! Here the situation is scary but I’ve noticed that, in the latest days, people are starting to take this issue seriously; it seemed to me that they underestimated it in the past weeks. IMO, once people are aware of this risk and implement the proper measures like avoiding crowded places it shouldn’t become too bad. And yes, putting it into perspective, there are other causes of death a lot of people don’t talk about, like the seasonal flu, which kills hundreds of thousands of people every year. Some facts worry me, though: There are some affected people, even in their fourties, who need a specific device to brearhe for some weeks; seasonal flu doesn’t cause things like that, usually. The elderly ones are particularly at risk,so I, being 31, am afraid to have the virus and pass it to older coworkers, for instance. The hospitals are so full that if you have any accident or illness you may not get the right care because there are so many doctors busy with this virus. I’ve heard at the newscast that they have also called back some retired doctors and, if I’ve got it right, some guys who are almost graduated have been involved to collaborate.

AFAIK in most houses there are dynamic IP addresses; mine is dynamic and changes from time to time. I’ve never tried but I think you can change it if you have a VPN or maybe even without it. It would still be better than using only the account as an identifier, though. Another possibility could be to limit the usable time of each session to something like 10 minutes until the user buys the module.

First of all, history teaches us that usually when we try guessing like this about the future, time proves us wrong. Trying to forecast the future can still be interesting, I think. When contemplating the possibility that unmanned aircrafts will replace the manned ones, I wonder what are the possibilities that they will end up attacking the nations who deployed them. I’m not talking about machine learning letting the machines develop greed and emotional self awareness eventually making them rebelling against humans; I’m talking about the possibility that they could be controlled remotely by the enemy. Unless you completely rely on AI and not put any radio receiver or something similar in them, there must be something that you can use to control them. What if the enemy takes control? Even if they manage to make them land in their territory and take control of them later by tinkering with them on the ground, it would still be quite a problem.

We are digressing quite a bit, but it just seems to me that, at this point, one more off-topic post after all the ones written in the Razbam subforum won’t be a problem. I am not an expert on aircrafts systems and I can’t really tell whether problems that I encounter while using the Harrier happen because of my mistakes or because it’s a bug. Surely the way they have addressed the ghost velocity vector issue makes me think that the criticism is proper. On the other hand, I also think that being aggressive to the Razbam team will probably hinder their working progress because usually when you feel that everybody is against you, then you work worse. I’m sure they don’t intentionally want all those bugs to exist, either... . Therefore, I think that if you want them to deliver, then you shouldn’t be aggressive. I myself dislike viper2097’s negativity, but this doesn’t mean that I dislike him as a person or his opinions: I just dislike the negativity.

I have learnt a new English word which describes very well the way I feel about this accident, too. On the technical side, I’ve heard at the newscast that two missiles were shot and that the first one missed the target. I find this quite weird because the target was big, little maneuvrable, subsonic and it wasn’t even trying to evade the missile.

Wait a second. When someone writes "1000 X 1000 km" I understand 1000 km x 1.000 km = 1.000.000 km². A quick search on the internet tells me that Qeshm island is 1.336 km², which is about 1.5 x 1.000 km² but just a small fraction of the promised area of this upcoming map. EDIT: now i see what you mean, sorry: 1.000 km² overall for all the islands together. I think that when they wrote "Although the island portion of the map will be approximately 400x400 km, the overall map size will be 1000x1000 km" they made some mistakes because by looking at those islands in Google Maps it seems impossible that they make 400 km X 400 km = 160.000 km², like you wrote. They wrote that the initial size of the map will be 400 X 400: maybe someone got confused with that piece of data.

Well pickey, I respect your opinion, which definitely makes sense. I am also glad that you haven't called me a teen or a whiner :lol:. I personally don't find the points # 1 and # 2 interesting for me, although they are valid, while # 3 is something that I didn't consider and that could really be appealing for me, owner of a low performance PC. One extremely important principle that holds good in business and in life is that, often, there is not a right choice and a wrong choice: every choice is a compromise with pros and cons. Stating that there is a perfect map choice is basically impossible: we can only write considerations.

I do aknowledge that, when I said that the developers could have for xample fixed some bugs instead of releasing this map, I picked the wrong example. The principle of misusing resources, IMO, still holds good. Do you want a better example? Ok, so they could have expanded/improved/completed the Caucasus map instead of making this one. We already have plenty of water in the Caucasus map and in the Persian Gulf. Although there is a difference in salinity, temperature and maybe color, from the point of view of a virtual pilot, there is basically no difference between the sea of the Tropics and the Black sea. Really, I don't want to be negative, but considering all the amount of water available in those two already existing maps, I really can't see why some people think that it will be a great improvement. I DO NOT hate this map and I will probably download it and enjoy it, even considering that, from the screenshots, it looks to me that it's in an advanced state of progress by now, so not using it would really be a waste.

Rereading my post, I think that I haven't expressed exactly what I meant. The EA/buggy state of some ED products was just an example. I could answer that for instance the maps theirselves could be improved: damage model of runways bombed with either instantaneous or delayed bombs is quite poor. Another problem: ground friction. A lot o f people have mentioned the fact that when you taxi with an aircraft in DCS, it needs too much power to start moving. And I really can't believe that an F15 in the grass won't budge unless you apply full thrust and sometimes it won't move even with full afterburner (at least last time I checked there was this issue). Couldn't those maps expert fix those problems for instance? So now you or someone else could make me notice that there is another point that I have missed and then I could reply back and you know what? Probably at the end of the day you are right, because I think that if ED, the real expert here, has chosen to create this map, then they must have had good reasons. On the other hand, and that's the concept that I consider the main one here, if an end user doesn't like a product, it's importnat that he has the right to politely express it on the forum, so that ED can consider it. After all, they are working in order to satisfy us, so IMHO polite criticism will actually help ED, because they have to know how to use their resources to satisfy us. If I think that it would be better to have a better friction model than a new free Marianas islands map, where's the problem if I state this? It's ED's problem to know whether they can use the same resources or not, but at least they'll know what we want.

First of all, I want to point out that I like the screenshots and that I will probably download the map; if there won't be enough space in my SSD I could buy another one, after all nowadays they are quite cheap. However, I would also like to give a little support to flanker1's opinion because I think he has a point and that you have answered his comment with too much negativity. The fact that a DCS user talks about "waste of resources" sounds legit to me. There are people who are waiting for bug fixing and for the completion of EA modules and so one could think that maybe creating a map whose utility is questionable is a wrong way of managing ED's resources. I, myself, don't feel able to judge that and if ED has chosen to develop this map for free instead of doing something else I guess that they have their reasons and that they surely don't have to explain those reasons to the users. I just wanted to say that you can disagree with the opinion quoted above, but it makes some sense.

I am also curious to know whether there will be a dedicated Supercarrier manual in which the way it works is explained.