Hawkeye_UK

If they get all civilian navaids operational, and the military public available ones, i will be more than content. I do not understand why OnReTech have literally failed to really invest any time in what is one of the core components of any map - can't nav to a target, can't hit it! Its really a VFR map at this point. OnreTech should be transparent on this fact, or sort out once and for all the mess (i think a year on, its a fair request)

Again thank you!

Thanks Minsky you have saved me alot of posts tonight! Utterly painful a year on we are still having the same mindset when implementing the map. How can the dev's not just get navigraph etc for the month and sort out the nonsense that is radio nav on this map at present. There are so many missing tacan's, nav beacons, its basically a VFR terrain.

What is actually amusing is that ive genuinely just opened this after i read the first post and predicted your reply in that - priority medium (everything is medium lol). OnReTech a year on, most of the initial airbases and nav points are still missing, some you replied to as priority medium and they are still missing. Going forward I will not be recommending this map for either SP or MP to the wider community. Ensuring potential customers are fully briefed and made fully aware that you place zero importance on navigation (actions speak louder than words), that you do not adhere to implementing them and that if you are interested in gen 3 aircraft (that alot of the newer DCS aircraft are) and you want to perform radionav or poor weather then this map is not for that type of player. You may recall i was intitially supportive of this map and made recommendations of what additional airfields would be required (note that some of these have been added in this update) to make it relevant for MP. However the last year and the lack of getting the basics in which includes being able to navigate, along with vast amounts of radio silence its difficult not to be skeptical. Many people want the basic's in first before some hotel on the Nile or hot air balloons being included. When will you knuckle down and actually correct the database file for all tacan's and ILS frequencies? Be this a month, 3 months etc i think the community deserve to know. I will change my opinion when this is actually done, until then expect a negative projection. If i can place all the tacan markers in the Mission editor in a day, and say using a navigraph account of what $10 (im sure there is freeware out there also) why are these still missing?

Sinai map frequency not working - who would have thought. To be honest it's at the stage where a year on, and dispite many requests for nav freqencies (not just the countless ILS, or lack of them) that I actually place the fault with ED for not ensuring a quality control that as a flight game/"sim" you cannot even navigate correctly on a map. It should be a requirement that all real world tacan and nav beacons are on the map from day one, its not a complex process! OnReTech need to finally address the simple issue of placing all beacons, nav points and ILS on the map and ED need to fire a fox 2 at them to sort it out. However considering the history, i expect very little - or even a reply from OnReTech, might get a, noted - added to list, priority medium at best.

Good lord and here was me thinking you had not been able to escape an S&M dungeon for the last year or two - good to see you still alive and surviving!

That's ok OnReTech re not always being able to do what you want. Background - been playing since lomac days, own all modules except 2 and have contributed over the years to many EA products upto and including the F4 (the latest was the bombing table adjustments recommendations). Use all maps. The issue i have with you as a company (not personally obviously) is the terrible communication to the EA people that are thus trying to assist you in this product development. I will ask for the record, what is going to happen also to all the missing tacan and nav frequencies. If i can add them in the course of a day, to the best of my ability using the tacan product we have in mission editor, why can you not add them in the course of a year? Its about communication and the total lack of it. Once you grasp that you will understand your consumer base much more and be more successful. We want this to work, we want more third party map makers, hence why we bought your product. What we don't want is another dev that doesn't provide communication or reply to things. I think most would be happy if you could confirm that you will reply in a two to three week window, no one is asking for instant replies, but an acknowledgement and follow up. Right now this is far from the case. Whatever the shortcoming or reason for this must be addressed or your will not suceed, and we want you too. As a closing note and more for ED, what this implies is we have third parties talking to each other and ED is not aware (as per here and discord re nineline). I struggle to comprehend this how can ED not know what is going on? Surely all discussions should go through the seller of the product to the consumer? Again i also go back to testing, and lack of it in the closed beta - for this not to be on the patch notes is asking for trouble, you could off ofset some of the annoyance with clear communication.

I'm very keen to assist with EA - but the pure lack of communication on this one is really remarkable, as for just deleating content that was there that alot of people have already built missions around is plain wrong. I can honestly say i would never buy another OnReTech EA product, not due to quality but purely down to the unnacceptable lack of communication when it can be months on end before something is even replied to, or not at all. In addition to this, why are we still missing 80%+ of the real world navigation aids - with gen 3 aircraft being so popular, it is appalling that despite repeated requests it is neither acknowledged or done - a year on and even at new Airfields that have been added - very, very poor.

you sure about all that..... As for Mk1 eyeballs only being able to report with limited precision, really? Perhaps TA guys on a weekend hill walk lol. You tend to find people watching for troop movements have alot of gucci kit my friend and are able to bring down hell, very precisely.

Fixed is one thing but a year later since release i do hope that this next update sorts out the mess that his tacan and vor nav on this map. There is SO MANY missing, i have literally added more in a training map that i use that you have included on release. Whilst this is a game, and making pretty scenery is important - remember it is meant to be a flight simulator and radio beacons are a huge part of that especially for the growing number of gen 3 aircraft in the game. If the next update does not include a thorough overall and make real world frequencies available then as far as im concerned it will be a failure. There is literally zero reason why this cannot be included, it is not some overly long process. If you dont know what they are, even a one month of navigraph will give them to you!! As far as im concerned, this and the poor communication over the last 12 months on this when requested historically has not been good enough. Yes i did this last year, it is insane though i literally added 5 times or more than what onRetech included in release - was very very poor and for me ED should have a standard that all maps when released at least have a nav template in (given its the most straight forward part of the map). As far as im concenred i wouldnt allow a map for a flight sim to be released until these had been added - QA and all that.....

Yea Brutal. The greatest generation no question, a time before woke people didn't exist.

@Zabuzard Got to try this last night (just got caught up with the patch). Thank you for implementing this i'm sure that anyone that uses it will agree its so much better now for interacting with the incremental jumps in the units. So much quicker to change now especially in VR. Thanks again.

Need to read the context, 4 years relates to New Zealand - certainly that should be in the game, not even worth debating, only a clown would!

4 years is not long enough for a request it seems? I would add this is not the only request Rudel as i recollect making a comment on another thread some years ago. Insulting really. Whilst this is only a game, you only have to have a walk around a commonwealth war grave to see the sacrifice and contribution New Zealand has made, be it in WW2 or more recent conflicts. I find it hard to believe Afghanistan is not a selectable country given we now have a map all about it or New Zealand (Still) are not a coalition partner especially given the latter where at the tip of the spear for some operation's in this theatre. I think an answer 4 years on why this very simple request hasn't been expedited is just.

ED you have released the latest map yet why can Afghanistan not actually be chosen as a country to add to a coalition? Also whilst we are discussing this topic i'm quite unsure how all these years later we are still awaiting New Zealand? I'm not going to list out here all the significant contributions they have made over the years in real terms, but suffice to say they should have been included in a selectable country as part of the coalition be it on your WW2 maps through to modern day. Why on both please @BIGNEWYor @NineLine

I'm generally happy to wait for EA development, but what i must say is the long periods of silence have been a bit weird. As in long periods with no replies. The one thing i struggle to understand is the easy wins such as being able to navigate the map with tacan's and radio nav's should be a day one thing. There is a metric ton missing from this map, including ILS freq also - i have no comprehension how this can take a year. For me going forward ED should specify as being a flight "simulator" that the basics such as these nav beacons are present DAY 1, esp with the focus on gen 3 aircraft these days. It is no exaggeration that i have twice as many of my own freq's inserted into the base map, than OnReTech put in the original release. That is not simply not good enough and to wait 12 months without ANY updates i think has been below expectations of even a DCS EA module. Only the Supercarrier has been worse.

@NineLine@BIGNEWY Are ED going to explain why this highly valued contributor to the community who provides critial support for latest gen headsets was completely ignored to an extent he's now no longer willing to help. We also need to hear the short and long term plan for VR and if ED are going to support properly. Please also can you confirm are you in a position to actually get the resource base this requires and have the ability to get the dev's to implement this - or do we need to start addressing our concerns directly to Kate/Matt? This is fine i just don't want to waste my time, if your not the people that can assist. Without VR and getting the communication process improved to avoid shortcomings that this latest game patch has exposed, you will lose alot of high spending customers, this is not a debate point, just fact.

Ready couldnt agree more, and also where is the transparency with this mistake? Why would you not communicate this on the patch notes especially if this was picked up in closed beta? Once again we get to the general situation of VR just not being important to ED, and ED having terrible communication. It's simply not good enough. Alas until a content creator makes an issue of it, it wont be an issue. That is the world we live in it seem's these days, deeply dissapointing this was highlighted over a year ago.

66% resolution - yikes, i might as well just connect up my Rift S lol......thanks for the tip and yea i've tried but for my eyes it felt like going back a generation in VR dropping the res down that much. The reality was this was warned about - and well ED didn't take that into account. There is no stable, and no warning. There should have been on the patch notes this is not compatible with high end headsets using Quad Views (an accepted norm these days by most in the community). A situation that should not have occured. I personally would not have hit update today if i had have known in advance.

Mbbuchia yes i went through and read the entire post after i had left the above reply. Usual ED saying one thing re how important VR is to them, then actually doing nothing about it. How this wasn't picked up on the internal testing is beyond me and if know about why hasnt ED put on the patch notes, Pimax users do not upgrade at present etc. Its really really poor. Once again to the point - why is a commercial operation alwasy so reliant on the community trying to bail them out of the sh"te

How can you not have anyone with a Pimax Crystal on your testing team. Painful - i have a Quest 2, Reverb G2 and a Crystal sat on my desk for god's sake and im not even an IT company or have any professional interest in this sphere. You like to say your embracing the future and VR is important (as per wags interview some time back) how can you credibly say this without even testing the basics - ONCE AGAIN the internal testing team have let game breaking issues through to release, and its not like we even have the option to revert to "stable". What is going to be done, and more importantly when.

@NineLine @BIGNEWY @mbucchia Bignewy/Nineline What is it going to take to get this sorted in a Hotfix - as more and more people switch to Pimax this has to be a priority surely - shocked to see its a year old but the workaround no longer works. Mbucchia - in the interim is there anymagic you can do as waiting for ED is like waiting for us to colonise Mars.

Sorry just picking up on the forum posts - thanks that's great news and im sure othe players will find this much more sensible/useful too.

No problem - it was clear straight away after repeated testing there was a problem and not map specific. Good to hear the bug is fixed, look forward to that although alas my phantom time has been low these last few weeks, will be putting alot more time into it again this month all being well. Fantastic module, really excellent release.

Unless the APKWS for the A10 got changed in the last few patches, then they are certainly not one shotting a T80/T90/Challenger/Abrams MBT ingame - how do i know this - because i have tried them on every tank in game on a training range and on MP.