Hawkeye_UK

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.

Not had any issues in the F1 on the Syria map as navigate by it alot. Tacan is a bad example to compare to as that has its own separate issues. This is purely talking about VOR/ILS.

Yes away from that, its EA - but what im on about is the core usability and interaction with the player - whether it calculates correctly at this stage is less of a concern as HB will sought. Get the basics right first, aka the ergonomics to the player.

I only play the MT version - given that we are now over 12 months in its really more the standard now for playing. I see little point in ST play or testing given that should be phased out. I think it important that HB take the same approach - it is pointless to be testing on both ST and MT given that MT is the version we need to get right!! I have tested on both Virpil stick (with a thrustmaster F18 grip which i prefer) however have tested it on a warthog base, Virpil throttle, warthog throttle (odd binding i know but just testing the button theory) and even dug out a very old extra 1600. All with the same effect. It's exactly the same issue as when the mossie was released where one keypush moves the trim too much, someone in the community brought out a fix that reduced the value of the key input somehow and it was sorted, basically was like 20% of what ED had released. The same can be said of the reticle depression on the F4 where a brief switch moves it no less than 6 units. This is not a hardware issue, how do i know this, i have literally all modules except the Mig19, CE2 and the FC3 A10.

Mike i've been in and retested on the Incirlik approach on Syria using the 113.90 KHM vor station to the North East for Navigation on the way in. I have track files and the miz file which i will upload in due course once had time to timestamp the bits to look at. But as an early heads up there are definite issues in the way the VOR stations do not always update and have to be cycled or do not capture them despite being within LOS and terms. Also having multiple captures of ILS not work - cannot find what the cause is , sometimes it works (generally when you try and use it as the first nav point tuned, but after that it can become a lottery). Given the VOR issues also i think its one of the same issue. No mod's installed, clean install to test, new mission file (i created a new one knowing would need as simple as possible from my standard test miz file that has a2a spawn scripts etc). Edit - So just to expand on this, i have had VOR stations that even tune but then as you fly past them at say 15000 feet they don't update or track. Im just minded that while most people will be wanting to test weapon's etc the basics of nav can get missed. Files just uploaded - i need to add time commentary (working on now so expect re-edite of this message) but you should be able to see from where im looking what is going wrong in the cockpit. Note these are not conentrating on flying onspeed or landing im purely interested in the nav beacon and the signal received. HB ILS AND VOR BUGt Track file Comments - Why is the ED track replay so poor to be able to commentate on , timestamps cant rewind etc! Premise of the mission is to take routing via KHM on 113.90, switch for a TACAN Nav approach for initial Incirlik 23 prior to ILS Capture. Both ILS freq and tacan 21X are set in the mission editor panel although you will see me manually tune the ILS post going to KHM. Note 113.90 on the track tuned on the Vor panel, captures but then good example of it failing to track the beacon flying past it, only after multiple cycles of the mode selector to tac, nav computer and back does it recapture it behind the aircraft. ILS caputured fine within parameters and landing. Approach 2 same track file - You will note the repeated attempts to capture VOR KHM on 113.90, finally only getting it after repeated switching to INS nav and back to VOR mode. Tracks VOR ok as passes by it, then start the TACAN approach on 21x, at 50 miles i get the system setup for an ILS approach on 111.70. Not sure why the jester wheels then shows up, i certainly did not fly with it open, it was closed. Intiail approach for ILS low but that aside at no point and despite being on the PAPI's for the later stage of the approach did the jet receive the ILS ADI directions for glidepath. TRACK FILE 2 - HB ILS AND VOR BUG 2 - VOR station captured, however doesnt track overflight and point at beacon when passing. On recycing nav mode back to VOR again requires and tracks on second pass of VOR. Swtiched to then Tacan initial all ok. Switch to ILS circa 10DME and no signal picked up, you can see the map position also as i check F10. This is a better example of not capturing the ILS than approach 2 from track one. Conclusion - VOR NAV and ILS is unreliable, i just cannot fathom out the lottery of why sometimes the VOR will track and other's it wont, whatever reason i think the VOR and ILS are related. Are you sending out a polling time, its almost like the system isnt asking for an update or something IDK. Hope this helps. HB ILS AND VOR BUG 2 - Copy.trk HB ILS AND VOR BUGt - Copy.trk HB F4 ILS TEST TO FIND BUG - Copy.miz

Heatblur, Congrat's on a great launch for the F4, it hasn't disappointed i will just start with that! However certain aspects are questionable for VR and general use, the bombing table calc being one of them. This is not down to the window size or location which i know is work in progress. Release altitude, with click up and down - why is it in such low feet increments, its practically useless as would take minutes holding the mouse upto 15,000 or higher. Why not have it in blocks of 500 feet makes ALOT more sense, for VR and non VR alike. So each press of the button cycles up 500 feet (with blocks of 50 feet below 500). Have the table default to 3000 for quick alterations either way. Airspeed - same really blocks of 25 i would suggest starting at 300 but default value being 450. Also the one thing that is really needed for usability is a keyboard scratchpad built into that page so we dont have to try and fumble with the keyboard - its a non starter in VR and cumbersome to say the least. Needs some dev time for sure to make it usable. Another option would be in the jester wheel to have some preset release airspeeds and altitude's. Target altitude could be set with a jester wheel that takes you into a 0-9 wheel. Hope this helps but really feel like it needs more meat on the bones.

Ok so just rebooted the game (in 2D this time i normally only fly VR) and opened the same mission and same slot as before airstart - ILS needles came straight on as soon as turned the right dial to ILS/VOR, left then cycled through and didnt matter. Im going to have to spend time to try and recreate why it wouldnt work - the only thing different thus far to previous attempts was i had been using VOR's to navigate prior to switching to the ILS. Im wondering if something as part of the mission upto this point is then locking out the ILS. Going to have to retest and sink some time into working out what was wrong, as im confident there is definately a bug (given i opened the same mission, same slot, same weather, eerything the same the only thing difference was moved the air start 200 miles to avoid the flight prior and straight to ILS - will report back if i can recreate.

Incirlik 23 - i will check again, but literaly done 1000s of ILS approaches in DCS over the last decade so yea i was surprised to not capture. The only difference on the setup that i had to your's was that i had the left hand dial on Vor/Tac also not nav comp, but the right dial was turned to VOR/ILS - i even turned it back on and off again and kept going around to recapture from around 10 miles out. Wondering if having the left dial set to anything other than NAV/COMP is what is causing the issue. The only thing i would add is on the test mission i have alot of sound files loaded (also on multiple frequencies (note all 130-135 and now 270 - 274 for the F4 aux). I'll retest on Syria but also on Sinai as want to create a list for the large amount of Nav freqencies missing. PS - Congrat's on all the hard work - certainly paid off, really enjoying the F4.