Shimmergloom667

NineLine or Wags: are we getting a patch on the 5th without JSOW and a small one on the 12th adding them? While I think the F-18 development is progressing fine we really need that drag model fix for the F-14 that was planned to come in this patch back in may. :)

Because others might own the module you don't own, so understandably the company managing all them modules wants to ship a patch that is tested as good as possible against *all* that stuff.

Except for the fact that ATFLIR is more complicated to implement and depending on core DCS work being done (which is why they went for LITENING as a stop-gap), that's exactly what we are getting. Dont't forget last year's poll, which directly influenced what the team is working on *right now*. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=219023

That is true. 2.5.5 has some bigger VR changes incoming, they need to be sure every module, includign 3rd party, works and given the nature of software development there simply has been unforeseen problems and delays. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's almost as if software development is no exact science and unforeseen problems can arise, that force delays. Crazy, I know.

Let's not start with semantics now, shall we? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States#20th-century_wars

Mainly Jester, but only rarely in MP, maybe two times a week: still - none so far.

At this point, my money and me will already be two days apart :D

This really seems to be a weird problem, I never, ever had a single crash using PAL/STT in both SP and MP.

How 'bout the F-14B Bugs & Problems Forum? https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=628 And seriously, if you don't want a probation or ban: read forums rule 1.16 and remove that NATOPS (the rule says "not newer than 1980, and one can argue about the F-14 documents, since it is a) still in use with the IRIAF and b) the late models are certainly newer)

Don't post NATOPS, post your bug reports in the correct forum.

Then you know more than me, I couldn't tell how long this problem takes to properly identify and finally fix. Kudos to you, I guess.

I don't know, I am not a programmer. Are you?

Even then you could have noticed... :) "MP. Fixed crash on the taxi in the multiseater aircraft."

The F-14s nav system can only store 3 WPs (plus FP, IP, ST, HB and a few areas) http://www.heatblur.se/F-14Manual/general.html#navigation-computations

It's on their bug tracker, so how do you reach that conclusion?

That's DCS AI wingmen since forever. Nothing HB can fix.

Haha, man this is neat - all my favorite DCS youtubers in one package. Awesome!

Yeah, I know that - must have misunderstood that, though :)

This, probably :D

Answer that for yourself - disappointed in how it progresses? Fine, don't buy ED early access products anymore, lessons learned. Easy, huh? I think the progress of the module has been very good so far, so a lull right now doesn't impact me.

If I bought an *early access* smartphone, which has been clearly advertised as incomplete, possibly introducing bugs over the early access period and the company asking for help in filing concise bug reports, then yes - it would be acceptable. It's almost like how ED introduced the F-18 early access, now that I think of it...:renske:

Just wanted to acknowledge: putting up "Search and engage in zone" on top did the trick, I died in several, colorful ways yesterday when all enemy flights decided to roll good on their spawn chance. :D

I was wondering about the sequence, my reasoning was: "if I put engage first, and there is nothing yet in the zone, it will orbit and not look further". Obivously it is the other way round! :D Will mix it up, the correct types of aircraft are selected! Will also double-check on if the task is correctly activated (which I suppose it is, because they are orbiting fine). Thanks for the heads-up!

Hey guys! So, I set up a few easy training missions for a buddy of mine so I can teach him all things DCS, and I put a few randomly spawning adversary flights in there. They take off, at the next waypoint they get the following advanced waypoint actions: - Orbit (circle, at a set altitude) - RTB on bingo fuel = on - Search then engage in zone (with the Zone centered on the waypoint they are orbiting) When trying it out, I engaged a pair of MiG-29s circling, but they didn't engage me as I would have suspected. What may be the reasons for this? - I got an A-50 circling a short distance off, so they even should have AWACS (do AI need to be on the same freq?) - the patrols are of varying skill, but even the higher ones didn't engage me - could this be just a matter of chance? There is no RoE set to green or anything, so I can't wrap my head around it right now.