phantomknight321

I remain hopeful that there will be a fix in the update today (I haven't checked, I am just assuming the update is still scheduled to release today) patch delayed until tomorrow, but I remain hopeful

This thread has me thinking the sweet spot from my 1080ti may be a used RTX 2080ti (If I can find one for less than 600) or the 3080. I just recently got my 1080ti a couple weeks back and while I am happy with the performance bump from the 1080 I upgraded from, I still seek more. Though, it doesn't really seem going with a better GPU will even get me the smooth experience I am seeking.

Another thing that can help is dropping more than one bomb in a pass. Kind of painful to do when you have limited stores, but by doing so it helps you have better chances of at least one of them hitting

Bringing this one forward. I just picked up the H420 and the custom drivers do seem to work with it, but the pen inputs are not detected whatsoever. I get the same strange device manager behaviors Echo179 got. As seen in the log files, it does detect the tablet using custom drivers: 2020-05-21 16:52:53,534 [1] INFO VRKneeboardLib.UcLogicDevice - Custom driver 2020-05-21 16:52:53,575 [1] INFO VRKneeboardLib.UcLogicDevice - Custom driver detected VID:256C PID:006E Device:Huion Something is not talking, and i have spent the entire day with the awesome and patient discord users trying to sort this out with no avail. I am determined to make this thing work one way or another! For the other poster that got the H420, did you ever get it working?

Somewhat off topic, but does your team still plan to someday become an ED partner and develop as a third party to sell your modules? I would love to see your next big project become an official release!

Hello, I noticed when attempting to bind the Antenna elevation and range axis knobs, I am getting some strange and frustrating behavior. Expected Behavior: Turning knob moves antenna knob or range knob to a point depending on knob position. Actual Behavior: Turning knob up or down increases the rate of change up or down, and moving it back to center makes it stop moving, rather than re-centering the axis. I will try and get a video of this behavior later, but is this actually correct? Anyone else having this problem? I vaguely remember this being an issue on the hornet, but haven't followed up to see what happened with it, and I haven't been using the axis anyway.

This sounds fantastic! In the same boat, cant really afford to pick up the tomcat and blew what I could on the viper because I HAD to have it, but someday I hope to grab the cat and experience it. Anyway, I think multicrew is fast becoming a hot feature in DCS. Not every jet needs it, but those that do seem to be pretty popular now. Moving on, I threw a thread out there asking about the viability of maybe a block 52 variant...same year and capabilities...I just like the idea of having the variety to choose different engines essentially

I know we are getting the Block 50 2007 F-16CM, but what are the chances we could also get the Block 52 of the same rough capabilities? Only main difference would be a different engine model, would be neat to have the choice of the two different F-16 engines. Probably a long shot, but I figured I would throw it out there anyway, maybe itll be something that can be considered in the future!

Just throwing my .02 in; for sure, i think the right direction would be bringing out older variants in the future, or maybe more unique variants with different capabilities. They could either sell them as standalone modules, upgrades to the owners of the viper we are getting, or maybe it could be both, so someone who does not have the f-16 in the future can pick which one they want, then add on the other variant later. I also agree on getting 2 seater variants, I haven't tried multicrew yet but on paper it sounds amazing, and I like the idea of having the opportunity to try it in other aircraft down the line

Not a huge loss; i typically find myself completely disabling the moving map generally, its so bright and clutters up my display. Only times i find it handy are when I am double checking an airfield I am landing at...but otherwise it gets turned off ASAP. Instead, I try and just use visual references, waypoints, and the kneeboard

Lots of great things that got touched on in here; I really appreciate the level-headedness that usually tends to prevail on these forums and the discord servers lately (probably due in part to ninelines hard work in maintaining order) I DO believe that part of the outrage around the viper in particular was solely coming off the heels of the carrier controversy. While the issues will probably have still come up, the community was already worked up from one thing, so it was easy to scrutinize the next. That being said, I think that the approaches being taken thus far are great. Allowing for the LAU-88, fantastic. Even if it doesn't happen in the end, I appreciate the effort to allow for flexibility in loadout (and I would be lying if I said I would never use it, despite being a strong defender of EDs choice to exclude it before). Any other outrage the community wants to get into over other things, like JSOW and Sniper stuff, people just need to remember that this is military hardware getting simulated, there is only so much ED can do, and I am positive they will do their best to give us the most that they can.

Good Afternoon, I noticed this quite a while back, but it was recently brought up on reddit and it has reminded me to bring up a bug report about it. Currently, the SUU-25 launchers do not perform correctly. Here are some notes from a reddit user that better explains some of the strange behavior: “...I've played a bit with it with limited success. If you select them on the Stores page and pickle, nothing will happen, BUT if you click on the delivery method button (the one on the left, where you get the CCIP/CCRP/AUTO for other weapons, mouse only, HOTAS button doesn't seem to work for this weapon) they'll all suddenly release. All of them. Which is a shame because your AFAC load goes from being capable of providing 45 minutes of illumination (170sec per flare * 8 flares per pylon * 2 pylons) to just under three minutes.” Thanks in advance for checking into this! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’d be ok if this was a special options setting for the a10 and hornet, I think that would be the ideal way to handle things. That said, I don’t mind things as they are for now. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Excellent! You are doing fantastic work, keep it up!

I know this is an old reply but did you ever figure out what was happening? If not, I think already know what it is; by design, Harriers take off in the air from land no matter what due to the AI being buggy, even if you don't have any AI wingman. I think it is the same for the carriers too. OP might've fixed that and I missed it though

[ALL MODULES][sP/CO-OP] Liberation Dynamic Campaign On mobile so it’s a bit hard to format but... On the first point, I just like the idea of setting up a full USAF flight, with F-16s, F-15s, and A-10s. Since the F-16 is AI only it would be nice to have. Also, US doesn’t really have a SEAD platform yet so the only way currently would be to use the F-16 AI. On that note, a future SEAD focused mission type would be pretty fun. Then on the last point, I agree with you, but would still at least like to be able to have a UI ability to pick what aircraft are available (at least the official DCS modules, I’m ok with adding mod aircraft manually) and also if the MiG-15 and F-86f Sabre could be included as options. They are old but would still be neat to fly in the campaign. (I say this as I don’t have either but have been eyeballing the Sabre for the next time it goes on sale...) *edit* just wanted to throw in a quick mission ideas list for your consideration in future updates: -SEAD -bomber intercept (scramble from airfield and attempt to stop attacking bomber) -fleet defense (same as above but defending the carrier from anti ship attackers) -transport convoy attack Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I just thought of a few potential features that could really help bring things to life: 1. AI only Aircraft options. It would be really amazing if you could also purchase and use AI Aircraft in your missions. Would be cool to, for example, set up an escort flight of F-16s to fly with you on a strike mission. Could perhaps label the aircraft as (AI ONLY) in the purchasing page or something. 2. I know this has been touched on before, but being able to set your loadout from within the UI would be utterly fantastic! Sometimes I want my flight to carry a different loadout but the sometimes I just want to hop in and fly without messing with all of that. 3. Also touched on by me and several others but JTAC and smoked targets would be awesome. Even if its smoke in the general vicinity, would give me a place to start looking. 4. Aircraft variety! Could we perhaps have the ability to set available aircraft in the initial mission setup within the UI? Also, would be nice if we could have things like the F-86 and MiG-15, even the warbirds as options. Do you think the aircraft available for purchase could eventually be tied to the airfield you have captured, forcing you down the low-tech route? (Maybe this could be an optional thing? Considering some people may not have all the modules) Thanks for the continued work on this, its fantastic!

As mentioned by someone else, can you please point out what particular bug you are referring to? Though I rarely use the sidearms (harrier is not a proper SEAD platform! Would usually rather save those rails for AIM-9s instead!) when I have carried them for their intended purpose of self defense against radar AAA, I have had no issues employing them. That said, perhaps there is just something I have not experienced before... Perhaps if you: 1. Post this thread in the problems and bugs subforum so the devs know where to look and, most importantly... 2. Be as elaborate and helpful as possible in outlining the bug you are experiencing. Simply posting that your wondering when a bug will be fixed and that your tired of waiting helps nobody.

Thanks for responding! I agree on your first point, it is best to just push forward to the EFM, at the end of the day that is probably the best outcome For point 2, what I am referring to is the "click zones" where the cursor switches to indicate that the switch can be clicked. Most of these are spot on, but there are a couple of switches (cant verify which specific ones at the moment) where the zone that you can click is not exactly where the switch is. Not a big deal, and certainly not worth dev time over other higher priority fixes. And for point 3, thank you for investigating, anything that can make this aircraft even more enjoyable is a great thing!

Just finished flying this a bit more; I think that it will be perfect for my total flight sim newbie friend to start in, I can sit in the back seat in VR and help instruct him, though sadly I cant take the controls. I do have some feedback: 1. The jet is VERY touchy about your AOA when landing and taking off. If you pull the stick back even slightly too much you will...well, explode. It seems like this is a consequence of the SFM and I hope this is resolved with the EFM. 2. Some of the switch locations dont exactly line up with where they appear to be. This is especially difficult in VR. 3. I know this has been touched on, but surely there is a way in the future we may get communications? It would really be nice, especially so I don't have to fuss with loadouts in the mission editor. If this is an SDK issue with no way around it, fair enough. Lastly, I want to just commend the work you all of done; of all the aircraft mods, this is the only one I see as a viable aircraft I would actually want to bother downloading and flying, until the community A-4 skyhawk comes along. I for one would love to see the group of you get to work together with a 3rd party dev in the future for a new, fully featured payed MB 339 module, or some other unique Italian trainer aircraft perhaps. Either way, thank you so much and keep up the great work, I am glad I get to enjoy this unique aircraft!

Just tried this out with minimal issues. One thing I really struggled with, however, was finding the ground targets for attack missions out of the first Persian gulf airbase. I know it would impact immersion a bit, but I am kind of spoiled on JTAC smoking and lasing targets, I wonder how hard that would be to bring to the table here...or even more far reaching, some fancy MOOSE or CTLD scripting, would make these missions come alive even more.

This is awesome! I’ll have to try this out later. By chance, did you address some of the strange weather issues? I know you don’t start in the north on PG with this update anymore, but before one of the major issues was the randomized weather would have the clouds right at ground level out there. Dunno if that was intentional or not Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ALL MODULES][sP/CO-OP] Liberation Dynamic Campaign Disregard. My question was answered. I’ll try this tonight.

I attempted a frontline attack mission. To be honest, I didn’t actually even pay attention to the loadout before modifying it, nor did I try the mission without modifying. I will try it again today at some point and see what loadout I end up with. *edit* I just loaded up a fresh mission and can confirm that you do get a 4 mk82 loadout for the F5. My personal opinion is that its better to take some rockets instead of all bombs, but either way at least the loadout is working on a role specific basis.

Just tested out the new version. New UI is killer, really helps with making things pop. Also really digging the fact you can now assign aircraft to any role; I just flew an attack mission and used my F5s to do the CAS, and just modified the loadouts in the mission editor. I do have a possible bug though, not sure if it’s related. Before the update my flight was always on 305, which wasn’t a big deal even though the briefing said 251. Now, I tried both frequencies and they wouldn’t respond. Not sure if it’s a bug in your application per se, but just an odd quirk I noticed now Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk