DLEGION

eh… i'm not payd for that, i did once investing a lot of times, not willing to repeat hours of testing anytime soon. for me something wrong, and F18 pilots will notice for sure when trying to dodge a R73 they will explode into a fireball and lose theyr mission, while su27 will easily dodge F18 aim9x and laught at it. F14 cant even be locked by aim9x in rear aspect sometimes, but afterall ...is my task to prove it ? no. so lets keep it as it is , some players will be advantaged, some really disadvantaged, but thats life afterall !

i tried to explain in my previous post, anyway for me its a bad idea because: 1) me personally dont like montly fee, i never payed a montly fee for a game and never will. that a very personal reason, i'm "that kind" of person, some can say i'm a sith because i live of absolutes, but thas it. 2) a montly fee system would discourage any new "almost casual" player from playing DCS, only veterans will pay it, cutting off new "fresh meat" . And yes, i know many people that started to play just because a friend was playing it, then started to like, then bought a cheap module (f15 or su27 mainly) , and so on… . 3) montly fee is not a direct control on products or devs work, in fact i think its LESS leverage because having a steady income makes devs do what they want even more , i would instead pay for a finished product or a "finished update step 2" product, a thing i can buy knowing exactly what it is and what it does. real market works like that, you create a product, and sell it. you create a new version with real improvments, and make customers pay for the new version, and so on. i dont know guys, ED has 125 people… and we all would pay more (in different ways ok) for a better product (read: more complete modules, more update to modules, updates to core engine, less bugs, more new modules ecc..), but seems they struggle to deliver it. from a commercial point of view, its sad see a market willing to pay money , and an offer unable to take full advantage of it. maybe i just miss Igor times…

i've found some images of damaged F18, mid air collisions, a missile to an engine and even a crash. wings still attached, except the crashed one, all them menaged to get back to base… seems real F18 is quite strong!

hello guys, looking this video on YouTube more or less around minute 12:30 where it explains the pipper kill on his target...i noticed the pipper move waaay less then in DCS ! its more in line with F15, F14 and all other Aircrafts ! in DCS only F18 pipper seems really "nervous" dancing all around hud with no apparent reason ! just to let you know ! hope they fix. thanks , see ya!

hello guys, looking this video on YouTube more or less around minute 12:30 where it explains the pipper kill on his target...i noticed the pipper move waaay less then in DCS ! its more in line with F15, F14 and all other Aircrafts ! in DCS only F18 pipper seems really "nervous" dancing all around hud with no apparent reason ! any info on that ? thanks !

eh, the statistic is quite disappointing. i made 3 big tests, frontal, back and "realistic" ...more or less a 90 degrees aspect. repeated every test reloading the custom mission i made in the editor each time. i had to use AI because no player had the patience to test it, but i did many test in MP too on justdogfight server, with random players, so i choosed to reject that results because may be not accurate, having different players skills, but for the record the results were in line with AI results. frontal with F18 vs su27 i could dodge an R73 7/10 times (read 7 out of 10 times) frontal with su27 vs su27 i could dodge R73 7/10 times frontal with F18 vs F18 i could dodge aim9x 7/10 times frontal with su27 vs F18 i could dodge an aim9X 6/10 times so..frontal is more or less fine. back with F18 vs su27 i could dodge R73 2/10 times back with su27 vs su27 i could dodge R73 6/10 times back with f18 vs f18 i could dodge aim9x 3/10 times back with su27 vs f18 i could dodge aim9x 8/10 times thats really disappointing..and its supposed to be the best case scenario... "realistic" 90 degrees (more or less): 90' with F18 vs su27 i could dodge 1/10 times 90' with su27 vs su27 i could dodge 5/10 times 90' with f18 vs f18 i could dodge 3/10 times 90' with su27 vs f18 i could dodge 7/10 times i cooled the aim9x on F18 everytime, i made 7 test each version and sometimes some more when i was not sure of the results, the AI seemed quite reliable doing almost everytime the same exact things. in multiplayer happened more or less the same strange situations, especially disappointing are the back shoots from F18 aim9x to a su27 (giving his back) that in many occasions failed both aim9x shooted.

eh… thats the red line i'm proud to have never crossed, and i never will cross it. >> NO, i will never ever pay for a montly fee, be it DCS or any other game. << for many different reasons (i dont see the necessity to write the reasons here and now, but feel free to ask if you really care). i should say i totally agree with your "pros" and "cons", i too feel the same about ED, and just a week ago i suggested to make users pay for a "update" of modules (i would pay), but a moderator closed the topic...so i suppose they dont like this kind of talkings. seems that ED dont accept suggestions, so... as many others users and moderators suggested to me, lets just sit and wait to see what happens. personally i like the news and video about DCS modules and features, but i would really love to hear some more info about this kind of choices ED plan to make, especially because i will not invest another € on uncertain politics.

hello, recently i investigated the behaviour of IR missiles, especially i compared R73 to aim9x, and after nearly a hundred tests, i found out that statistically R73 dont fall for flares 9 times out of 10 while the aim9x falls for flares 9 times out of 10. is that normal ? i supposed aim9x being more recent was at least equal if not better, here seems its not even on the same League ! any info on that ? here a link to an example of the test: thanks! PS: test have been made with F18 for aim9x and su27 for r73, have been tested different aspects, like front , back and realistic 90 degrees angles (the one of the video in the link). results have been consistent… aim9x usually falls to the first flare dropped, at worse to the second one.

i still have this problem, its killing my eyes… any solution ?

heh… Arctander, i agree with all your points. and i mean… all of them. you pinpointed exactly the problems...but the actual solution (using your words: "they have accelerated the F16 release to share development costs inside the same time frame" ) is not a real solution in my opinion. F16 will have its own troubles and cost, and they'll need to rush another new module to solve the same problems. i work hard to pay bills, and i'm not happy to waste money or pay two times for the same product, but from a commercial point of view, right now that most people already own F18, keep working on it will just not bring more money...i'm just trying to suggest a way to make it profitable keep upgrading and debugging a product without do dirty things like "montly fee" or just delay until everyone forget it. to be honest… i use a simple "HotasX" paid 59.90€ and use hatswitch to look around, but i know at least 10 person using an hotas warthog, many have rudders pedals, nearly everyone has track IR or VR… so from my point of view if they misdjudged the cost to create a module like F18, i can understand it. i'm not saying i'm happy eh. i just say i can understand. and we can put some money in the software too, that is the core afterall , not just in usb devices that we use to actually play the core software. and i know where the "just wait" leads...i can be wrong, but personally i dont buy it. so in the end… i agree with your points, but i see no other commercial solution except making it profitable, if it bring money, time and efforts will be put in it without fear to be unprofitable, and the development will go on fast, thats how i see it at least. that said, obviously i would NOT pay for a promise of finish F18, i would only pay for the already finished version ready to test like it was for F14 in the free-trial weekend. i dont get fooled twice, LOL !

eh..what can i say... you are right and i was wrong. i supposed EA was "a thing for me" based on previous experiences, but looks like i was wrong. i enjoyed EA the first months, lets say the first year at best. new things to try, new things almost every update, there was a positive feeling. now it cause to me more pain than joy, each time i try a serious mission i just see the problems or missing features and i really cant enjoy and have fun. textures keeps flashing on the sea (i posted a topic under bugs about that, but noone answered me), many weapons just bug in the wrong possible moment (like harpoons not going to sea-skim height and get destroyed, harms missing a stationary target with radar still tracking me by 20 meters , JSOW not exploding even if properly set, bombing a train and look the explosion cause DCS crash to desktop ...ecc..) and after 300 miles of travel in the mission that is really frustrating, destroy immersion, and to me personally makes me just quit DCS and play something else just to try relax and forget the rage coming from playing DCS. In the last year i mainly played DCS on online gun dogfights servers, even there i suffer from small problems , like the F18 "butter damage model" where 1 bullet to the body is lethal 90% of times, with plane shutting down , or losing a wing. what make things worse is that every other plane is way stronger, planes like F15, F16, F14, M2000, JF17, su27, su33, mig29 ...even planes like mig19 and F5 are a lot stronger and can take more punishment than F18.... i'm no expert but makes no sense to me. well to cut it short… seems i'm not for EA, at least in the way ED means it. my bad , i did the mistake, i pay the consequences, its fine. lesson learned...for sure i will never pay for another EA in DCS. but with F18 … at this point that i have already pay for F18 EA… i would pay more for a finished product, otherwise my money already spent on F18 would have just been wasted. this looks like a good solution for ED too… so keep updating products and killing bugs is not an "unpaid job" that noone want to do, but can be a "correctly retributed job", that is a fine deal to me and will encourage ED to keep updating theyr modules.

f18c is a 10g plane, 7.5 is a political choice, like it was for F14 to soft limit to 6.5g. after 40 years of abuse F14 started to break for hard carrier deck slams, not for G abuse. canadian, swiss and australian are 10g planes, and are not different than USN ones. so, with good peace of F16 fanbois that hope to win every dogfight just pulling more G, and pretend every other plane nerfed so only they can abuse it, lets face the reality once for all and just accept that a clean F15, F14 F16 and F18 can all pull 10g and not snap wings or damage systems ecc. that said, its obvious that Mover say that pilots are not trained to pull more if not in Emergency, probably they not encourage F16 or F15 pilots to do that too, because 10G are a long term stress for every airframe, be it F18, F16 or anything else, but the navy are way more conservative with theyr planes due to carrier (hard) landings, a problem that air force has not to worry about on the long term. and should be also considered that navy rejected a naval version of F15 and F16 because , (togheter with other reasons), navy planes have to be designed from start to be more strong than air force planes, and strenght the Whole plane was more complex than design a new one. so i suppose navy planes are actually way more strong and can take more G punishment (and probably all kind of punishment) than air force ones.

well… i agree with the majority of posts here. in fact i'm waaay more negative than most of people here, because to me its clear that the commercial logic has taken over ...so… working on already sold modules (read: F-18 ) will just not bring more money. i'm still deeply disappointed but not surprised by years-old bugs not being addressed. that said, i would happily pay another full price (50-60€) for a finished F18 module. if the work is made and is quality work, i would pay >>>happily<<<, supporting ED again. to my eyes that can be a satisfactory solution for everyone,ED get more cash (for a quality work, so its fine), customers finally get what they pay for, many years ago. actual politic seem to just make a lot of unhappy people, and the "more modules" logic will just make all worse, there's no escape from Early Access. so, again, i suggest ED to rethink theyr politic, i'm sure many Others will be happy to pay for a good quality work to complete a module, instead to dump cash into incomplete modules that will struggle for years, or worse do like me and never buy a DCS product of any kind until my favourite module will be 100% complete and bug-free. hope they will think on that, even if probably they will not even read this.

is the thumbling in the following video even somehow possible in real F14 ? the guy seemed to do it with intentions, shooting just a bit too late to hit, but was on correct direction, and then he regained control easily ! VIDEO:

mah… mine is fixed on 59xx where xx just count from 01 to 59.

hello, i just noticed a 4 digits number, with the last 2 digits changing, just above the middle DDI button, what is it ? thanks !

i still have the track … the problem is that was a 2 hour mission, i made a CAP at 60 miles away, then come back to airport, rearmed-refueled, made a SEAD at 80 miles away, then come back to airport, rearmed and refueled, then made the bombing mission at 80 miles away... if someone will look into it, i can upload it somewhere !

eh… i didnt expected a bug, so i dint pay too much attention , but i can say for sure: mission is battle proven (played with friends at least 10 times) and submarines always correctly exploded if hit by JSOW, bombs, mavericks, rockets, even a kamikaze plane damaged them. in one occasion i killed them also with gun bullets !! the message of the hits refer to the third submarine (not on screen sadly) , correctly hit with 2 JSOW , and sinked (other friend see the explosion, the smoke column, and then the submarine model to disappear). i launched and programmed all JSOW exactly the same, i just changed the impact point with FLIR and updated it on JSOW, no other differences. with F6 view i see one JSOW flew into the ground like it have no target (can be my mistake, but its supposed to get the old target until updated or i'm wrong ?). i dont understand why 2 JSOW hit and exploded correctly, 4 hit but not exploded, 1 failed to target its designated point, and i dont know what happened to the last because i didnt see it ! i have the replay, but it usually bugs and things happens differently from what happened in real game (like often planes do not follow the route they did in the game, or crash into the ground when in real game they were up high in the sky ecc...) maahh !

dunno what happened, 8 JSOW were programmed exaclty the same, launched at 3 different targets (3 submarines ) , 4 targeted to 2 submarines one nearthe other… well apparently reached theyrs targets but didnt nothing . they seem to not explode at all. whats happened ? here the video i randomly caught : thanks !

seriously, i'm often critic about small problems ecc, but this time, i really have to say that the move of give a free weekend for F14 is the greatest move that i ever i saw in the few past years of videogaming. i grew up in the era of "shareware" and "demo" of videogames, and loved that because i could actually try, test and get appassionate before buy, and Always buyed happily after that. i got F14 some time ago with huge doubt about my PC specs, about F14 itself and about jester AI, and i really wished (i also opened a topic a long time ago) that there was a free trial. so, from the deep of my hearth, a really big THANKS for this policy of free-trial weekend ! hope it will bring a huge amount of sales too, but even if it does not, its a really good move, as customer i really appreciate it and will keep supporting a company that has no fear to let people try its great products before buy them, its also a statement of good quality in my opinion! really, really thanks for that ! :thumbsup:

well in fact they are NOT working as intended. in reality if they reach the ship without being destroyed by CIWS , they will probably hit the main radar or at least a radar, disabling the one it hits. its absolutely not to sink ship, but would work to blind a ship so next attack will be more successfull. but in DCS ...well ships dont have different damage for different components...so .. no way.

...i feel a bit ignored. any word like "reported" or "we will fix" or something from the devs ?

yep, passing to bore it works, but passing directly from TWS to vertical mode dont. i dont even have a key for boresight (i'm on a poor man joystick and i use hatswitch to look around)

aaaaah….ok thanks ! i had great videos to share...well i'm definitely not a great youtuber...so no way :( i would have partecipated with that video, LOL

noone have an idea how fix that ?