Hawkeye_UK

How about you sort out Sinai - and its navaids and AI taxi routes - its been broken since launch - so many beacons missing, ILS not working and very little been done - everything "added to list - priority medium" Minor two minute fixes not done - I think you will find many, including larger servers will not buy any more of your products until you start doing the basics.

How about a Map that they actually have working Navaids, including Tacan's, NDB's , Working ILS's. I literally have more inserted nav stations (mission editor tacan) that they have missed or not working than they put in. They release new airfields same problem. to remind OnReTec - THIS IS MEANT TO BE A SIMULATOR lol - ok game i know. Please start simulating Navigation - esp for gen 3 aircraft. Sinai is in a poor state at present, with little interaction with the community and everything listed as "added to list - priority medium". Why have we had silence - been working on Balkans, meanwhile Sinai can't even get spawn points right without blowing up, Ai taxi routes, or navaids. If you can't simulate systems we might as well just fly around in the Yak 52. Balkans would have been a day 1 buy for me - Not with there approach however, not until they sort out Sinai (should be a concern given i normally buy all modules and have done since lomac days).

@BIGNEWY 2 patches later despite you saying they would be added, Why are still Heatblur patch notes still not added to the month's main patch - why is this so hard to do, why does it feel like sucking blood out of a stone. I'm going on about it (when i shouldn't need to) because its a PITA searching through forums and want to see what was changed when. Can you confirm someone in Moscow, or one of the locations is actually going to do this, or would it be better for me to post it on the russian forums? Basic stuff....

@BIGNEWY You replied saying the patch notes on the change log would be updated to include Heatblur/Polychop - still not done as yet as a heads up 4 days later. Basic stuff, takes a minute surely, but does help. Can you make sure the records are correct, as when we start looking back and tracing when things changed its not ideal. Also note my other recommendation that campaigns get given their own page on change notes (its not like it was even a year ago, so many campaigns now its going to get laborious real soon to drill into core/module updates when testing.

Can someone confirm how this works with Pimax Crystal (as in the Main version with eyetracking, not the light version). Any issues with FPS drops or worse performance?

Lol can attest that in force 6 and 12 winds, or what all things being equal would be sea state 5 and 9 respectively the sea looks nothing like that. At 5 its getting rough, extensive foaming crests. At 9 your talking 50 foot waves and more, your not seeing sh*t low down due to the spray/foam visability very limited. Just to indicate how poor the new weather system is, you cannot have force 12 winds in clear skies, its just not happening! Fundemental error and no thought put into the design at all. I would suggest that the dev's speak to someone that has spent some time at sea as the current presentation is laughable.

Apologies for stating the obvious, but as its not been done i guess it needs saying. Would it not be an idea to have these included in the actual change logs? I note as at 21:30 GMT they are still missing (and it is a PITA having to jump all over to round up the missing patch notes, be it these or Polychop and the debarcle with the patch. EDIT -FAO @BIGNEWY / @NineLine

All good, just wanted to ensure the community got a response - on reflection was probably a bit harsh so apologies no offence meant.

reminds me of the old harrier bug with it sticking also. To confirm not a hardware bug - running virpil cm3 no issues on other pods using axis.

Great response from Polychop - is this a case of module out - lets go silent as per Gazelle?

This is very much the issue, the amount of varying hardware. The best way surely is a slide that runs from 0.1 to 1 (1 being the current default) in the special options tab in 0.1 increments so people can adjust (which then affect's the setting in the input lua). I'm fortunate enough to have a Virpil CM3 base, but using the thurstmaster F18 grip. On default the timing does cause alot of movement of the trim for a micro press, which is then different again to a warthog base or winwing panels. You can test this by just assigning the buttons on different controllers and note its affect for the same micro press.

Could be a mod causing a conflict - have you done the full and slow repair?

I have all maps, and test alot when home. I cannot recommend this map at present, especially if you want to use it for "simulation", it is nothing more than a VFR map at present. Since release day the amount of missing nav aids, or incorrectly working tacan's, radio beacons, ILS for runways is ridiculous, especially given the growing interest in gen 3 aircraft and also the historical nature of conflicts on this map. The biggest hinderance to the project is actually the dev, read the bug reports yourself, everything is thank you, added, bug list medium priority (then a year later we still have the same situation). Impossible to recommend until the dev sorts out the mess that is navigation, and also the taxi and ai routes around the airfields. Instead of this on the one update to the map so far we got granted additional vital airfields (with more missing or broken radio nav) and hotels that really should be the last thing to complete.

I did and the problem is trying, as i said in my post, politely, running the latest modules and terrain that have ground radar that read the terrain and trying to push that through a 13 year old CPU and 8 year old very limited GPU. It is absolutely a hardware issue as when you check that box it then stops alot of the resolution of the radar. If the user had to upgrade to say a 13th/14th gen intel, along with 64gb ram and a 4080 he wouldn't have any framerate issues.

Hate to be that guy, but your going to have issues trying to fly DCS on a 13 year old CPU, 16GB ram, no doubt same age and an 8 year old GPU as per your hardware. The problem is to satisy running the new modules on your machine would be to downgrade the product for others that have newer hardware and invest in the hardware. There was quite a few optimisation issues with this map on release but for me its running as well as most other maps currently. Invest in your hardware if you want to have a good DCS experience, its literally brutal on hardware.

I can only guess "Thanks, added to the bug list. Priority - medium" The state of radio nav on this map is not acceptable one year on from release. It should be a day one/month one resolution. We are not asking for rocket science here.

I struggle to find a response from you that isnt "Thanks, added to the bug list. Priority - medium" - it's almost like a copy pasted response. Whilst i know this is a new airport, I think what most people want to know @OnReTech as you simply refuse a year one to rectify nav data or tacan files and give a detailed credible response on why so many of these are wrong or missing from release what "priority medium" means in terms of timeframes. Your long periods of silence and failure to resolve the wider nav issues on this map is a reason why at present i cannot recommend for MP use for gen 3/cold war.

Imagine if they actually all had correct navigation and ils beacon data, and other nav points that have been utterly negleted since release. For the F4 guy let me say its very much a VFR map at present there is sooo much wrong at present with anythign to do with radio nav and well i dont see any progress

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.