viper2097

As it may get overseen by the Devs in the wishlist section, I would like to toss in that idea now also here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=254447

A Tomcat with a Sparrowhawk HUD is not a Tomcat. At least for me. I'm perfectly fine with the B and A, I love the perfect balance between technology and craftmanship. I would way more love to see the Devs working on an A-6 or Draken. (Not AI)

When I'm lasing a moving target, and I drop myself a GBU or Mav-E, then the impact is spot on the laser / target. If I'm buddylasing and another is dropping a GBU or Mav-E onto a moving target, the impact is way behind the target. Most times the target don't get destroyed or even damaged. Noticed this first when the cat has been released, tried it a few days ago and it is still an issue. Tried lasing platforms: F-14, F-18 Tried buddy platforms: F-14, F-18, Harrier But I'd guess it has something to do with netcode, rubberbanding etc. and all modules are affected the same. Here is one Tacview picture of our last session we tried that: As you see, the Mav-E impacts way behind the driving vehicle, while it still was locked perfectly in point track and also laser designated. The behavor is reproducable without any problems. The faster the vehicle drives, the bigger the effect is. The Trackfile is quite big as it was a MP session with 6 players over 1 1/2 hours. Also I'm quite sure that ED is aware of the problem and does not need any help to reproduce it. If so, please advice and we will try to create a shortest possible trackfile.

Any news on that topic? Maybe something that can be clarified with the next AdA visit?

You can raise the instrument and console lights with turning the knob, but they won't go down or out if you turn the knob back. They stay at the brightest position.

Well, the update today seems kinda surprise, but is also very welcome.

We have here a module which is released long ago and very well bugged. Some bugs are older then a year. We have another module which is in EA since 2 years, where no update was delivered since more then four months. So your official request is, to not bring that facts on the table and stay all over silent. Did I understood that right? If not, please tell me (or us all) what to do, if we are more then not satisfied with the situation. Or is this the kind of EA buisness model which is backed by ED?

That is something that I've learned too. After getting the taste of what it means to fly a two man ship, especially as AFAC, I can now (slightly) understand why the crews did not like the transition to the Hornet. I really love everything on the cat, its tailor sized for me, regarding the perfect balance between new technology, and old craftmanship. I would not like to have the D, too much electronics... (Maybe thats why I also like the Viggen so much) Another thing the cat teached me, was to get my eyes again more outside of the aircraft. You don't need a HUD or three game boys in your front. Get your eyes outside and build you own situational awarenes. You'll realize who much more worth this is, then blindly trust those MFDs and overloaded HUD. And the last thing it teached me was, that a case 3 with the Hornet is a piece of cake. Honorable mention: DLC. I want it in every plane. Even in my car. Would make nonsense, but its so genius that I would also like it there.

Oh, ich hab schonmal den Harrier an nem boom getankt, aber dass es auch umgekehrt geht wusste ich noch nicht xD. @Steph-JJ, die KC-135MPRS hat in DCS leider keinen funktionierenden boom, du musst daher an einer KC-135 (ohne MPRS) tanken.

Wasn't it planned to release at least an update to the cat this week?

Another week without any updates... There would be really important things to patch, like the PCA behavor in the Mirage (broken since a month), or the so long promised full steam work on the Harrier (no patch since 4 months). Well, I'm looking forward to see a bug free Mirage, and a Harrier that leaves EA in around 2025...

Just used it in the actual open beta and had not the need to hold the button.

I'm flying with an Odyssey+ and can see the ball and fly it very well betwenn 1 and 3/4 mile.

Had a flight yesterday on the CA map with the Viggen. Tried to dial in Beslan, which has the Base 21 according the kneeboard. Base selector on the radio stops at 20. Not possible to select Beslan.

Yes, great improvement over the old one :thumbup:. Would be awesome if it would also be possible to look at it with a mobile phone (not possible to see anything with Chrome on the mobile).

Is there still something bugged? Unfortunately, I had never the time to do some real research with testing, but very often something "feels" very wrong when I'm banking in the groove. Even I#m quite low on fuel and have fired all weapons, I need to go to 100% thrust to not sink anymore. Of course, the speedbreak and DLC then also gets stowed then automaticaly...

Of course I would like to see Razbam succeed with the Harrier. I really like the Harrier, and honestly, after the cat, it is maybe together with the Viggen the module I fly the second most. So I'm not bitching around because of lack of personal attention, I don't get tired of bitching around because I really fell in love with the Harrier and want it to work properly. Thats why I have a problem with the behavor of Razbam. And as Harlikwin said, (I had the same experience) as long as you only scratch the surface, everything looks fine, but the more you like the aircraft, and the more you dig into it, the more you see what big mess it is. And then you try to help Razbam with provoding bug reports, take the time to search everything in the NATOPS, provide it to them on the silver tablet, and it just get ignored, nothing gets fixed, and instead another module is being developed. Then there is the big promise that now everything will change, and everything will be finished and that it is worked full steam on the Harrier. Then, no update since 4 months. So why should we, paying customers, not feel like they are playing tricks on us? Maybe we should clean up terms: If I search the definition of "showstopper", google write me, that it is "an obstacle to further progress". This is the exact definition for the bugs I'm talking about, which are disturbing the most and which are not getting any attention by Razbam. In that context, a showstopper is a bug, that prevents me from finishing my sortie with success, if I would have been able to do it without the bug. Especially if there is no workaround. (And workarounds shouls also be never an argument for something broken) Example: CTD at startup -> If I can't even get off the ground, I can't finish a sortie. Known since more then a month. Laser stops working -> If I can't guide my bombs into the target anymore, my sortie has failed. Known since 1 1/2 years(!!!), not even a single comment on it. TDC Can't be slewed with a Ministick -> If I can't slew the TDC to designate a target, how could I finish a sortie? Known since EA release, not a single comment on it. Sidearm won't go off the rail -> If the Sidearm won't get off the rail, how should I be able to finish my sortie? That's just some small examples for showstoppers. So should we also come to some examples for the *perfect* behavor of Razbam? No "." when entereing a frequency the first time -> This is an annoying bug since I don't know when. One after the other says he is also faceing it. It is sooooo easy to replicate. Razbam is ignoring it, and probably not even taking a look at it without any trackfile. Any further questions stay unanswered. Waypoints show as 0.0 and without bearing -> Would even consider to add this one to the showstoppers, however, known since nearly three months, not a single comment. TPod point tracks and lasers while masked -> I would go as far to say that this is already some kind of cheating. Known since half a year. Not the slightest response. And I won't even start to talk about those smaller bugs, which you find out when you start to really dig into the module, which also gets fully ignored by Razbam: Wrong values in the VREST page or a stuck bitching betty Or do you fly in VR? Maybe you have not yet expected that bug? Belive me, I can't describe how annoying it is. Ignored since a 1/4 year.

Are we talking about different modules / Devs? Did you ever took a look at the bug section? Bugs are reported over years with not a single comment, neither a fix. Bug reports get moved without any word to the resoveld section, and they are not fixed. ONE(!) bug got now a response and probably a fix in the next update. Once again, no bugfix, neither any kind of update since 4 months. I like this comment very much: (Source) Shagrat, if you are fine with the quality of the Harrier and the behavor of Razbam its also fine for me. If not working core functions and CTDs as simple bugs, and not showstoppers for you, thats ok for me. But accept it that this is just your opinion - for me those are showstoppers. But when I bring up hard facts, don't talk them away with a helpless phrase like "You don't get enough attention, thats why you are bitching at Razbam". Grow up and discuss facts with facts, not with any personal opinions you think that you have about me. Everyone else I would strongly advise to build his own opinion on facts, not phrases. The forum is full of both, they just need to be seperated.

Its worth every cent.

Very well said.

I'd guess the F-14 will not be on sale during its first year, this ends in March. So don't expect any discount through Christmas.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=249134 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=254368 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=253877 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=229879 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=249959 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=240734 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=249958 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=250346 You don't need to dig deep to find them. Just fly the Harrier and use its systems.

If you say that the bugs on the Harrier are not more, and / or not more critical then on other modules, you are clearly not useing the Harrier. Or you maybe only fly a little bit around with it. CTD, not working hardware inputs and systems that just stop working are showstoppers. Or tell me how you can drop that GBU when you can't slew the Tpod, then it won't laser and oh, I forgot, you won't get that far because you get a CTD already on aligning. So lets try the siderms in the next step. Oh, they are not going off the rail. God knows why. If I may give you an advice: Fly the Harrier exclusively for one or two weeks. With all it systems and possibilities. Then we talk again about show stopping bugs. Oh, I forgot, Razbam also move bug reports to the resolved section even they are not fixed for years.without any comment. As I don't own the C101, I can't say anything about that module. And you are makeing a big mistake:.I don't want to see them fail. I want to see them getting their a** up and fix / finish their module. Once again: 4 months since the last update! So what should we do? Applaud them? For playing tricks on their paying customers? The most nice thing I can say about RB is that the OP should build his own opinion. And that was what I did.

Vielleicht sollte man mal eines voranstellen: Early Access ist ein gewaltiger Vertrauensvorschuss der user für einen Entwickler. Der user bezahlt 100% für ein Produkt und bekommt vielleicht 50% geliefert. Nirgendwo steht festgeschrieben wann und ob die restlichen 50% kommen. EA ist aber notwendig, da die Devs die aufkommenden Kosten für die vollständige Entwicklung eines Moduls bis zu dessen Veröffentlichung (bzw. Fertigstellung) zu finanzieren. Anstelle zu uns user zu gehen und uns EA anzubieten, könnten die Devs auch zur Bank gehen und um einen Kredit zur Entwicklung bitten. Ist jetzt prinzipiell nichts anderes. Wer aber von euch schon mal bei der Bank war, der wird wissen dass das dann wohl doch nicht so einfach ist. Jeder hat sich schonmal lieber Geld von der Mama geliehen, als von der Bank. Warum? Weils einfacher und praktikabler war. Geht aber nur gut wenn ein Vertrauensgrundsatz da ist. Der ist meiner Meinung nach, aktuell gewaltig angeknackst. Das wird jetzt entweder eine lange harte Zeit sich das Vertrauen wieder zurückzugewinnen, oder man ändert etwas am System um auch dem user etwas mehr Gewicht zu geben. Ich glaube das Problem ist nicht dass mehrere Flieger im EA sind. Das Problem liegt wo anders: Wenn ein Flieger im EA ist, und der Dev bereits 100% der Bezahlung genommen, aber noch nicht 100% der Leistung erbracht hat, so ist er in der Pflicht dies zu leisten. Kurz gesagt: Er soll an dem Modul arbeiten bis es fertig ist. Meiner Meinung nach heißt das sogar, dass es zu (fast) jedem DCS update auch ein Funktions, oder bugfix Update zum EA Modul geben muss. Schafft der Dev es also dass er an drei Flugzeugen zu gleich arbeitet, und keines durch das andere ausgebremst wird, dann spricht ja nichts dagegen. Passiert aber an Flugzeug 1 genau gar nichts mehr (oder entschieden langsamer), weil alles nur mehr an Flugzeug 2 arbeitet, dann passt das nicht. Mama wird auch nicht gerne sehen dass du dir ein neues Computerspiel kaufst obwohl du ihr noch 50€ schuldest. Würde eine konstante Entwicklung (positives Paradebeispiel: F-18 ) seit EA release passieren, so würden sich diese Fragen gar nicht stellen. Die Unzufriedenheit wächst immer nur dann wenn Stillstand ist. Beobachtet doch mal HB mit der F-14 und der Viggen: Man kann in den letzten 6 Monaten wunderbar beobachten wie langsam die Heugabeln und Fackeln rausgeholt werden. Warum? Weil nichts, oder nur sehr wenig passiert. Heugabeln und Fackeln habe ich hingegen bei der F-18 noch gar nicht gesehen. Warum? Weil konstant was weitergeht. EA heißt immer noch eines: Nicht fertig. Der User darf sich also nicht beschwerden dass heute IFF oder TWS fehlt. Er darf sich aber sehr wohl beschwerden wenn seit 2 Monaten nichts mehr passiert ist. Ich verstehe auch bis heute nicht warum das kostenlos angeboten wird. Hätte jemand ein Problem damit einen angemessenen Beitrag zu bezahlen? Ich glaube eher nicht. Ich hätte persönlich auch nicht das Problem wenn die Module das Doppelte kosten würden wenn sich alles dadurch besser finanzieren würde. Wert sind es die meisten alle mal. So kostenlos ist das Grundspiel dann auch wieder nicht. (Ich würde das "kostenlose Grundspiel" sogar eher nur als weitläufige Demo ansehen) Immerhin geht 1/3 von jedem verkauften Modul der 3rd Party Devs an ED. Also könnte man mal sagen dass 1/3 aller DCS Einnahmen in das "kostenlose" Grundspiel gehen. Ist dann halt Ansichtssache. Hat aber mit EA selbst gar nichts zu tun.

Neben hinweisen und kommunizieren wäre es auch sehr schön wenn sich ein paar Sachen nachhaltig ändern würden. Davon würden nämlich beide Seiten von EA massiv profitieren.