ngreenaway

These three are a little more practical

Careful, 9L, judging by a few threads lately, there are some who dont take too kindly to "auto-starters" :music_whistling: :lol: (to make it even easier, i bound to my hotas. Finding rwin+home in VR is a chore)

Depending on your point of view, that's exactly what additional aircraft modules, terrain, and supercarrier are... anything beyond the base free download is additional functionality, technically speaking

Who would've known he'd have such prescient ACM advice back then (No matter what Curtis Armstrong does, he'll always be Booger to me)

Give it time, if you're like me, after enough sales of picking up 2-3 aircraft at a time, you won't have any more to get & can start ignoring sales. Nice quote, ranks up there with his "if you're gonna suck, suck with confidence" one

That is the primary thrust of this thread: while other sims have stuff they do very well (and let's not forget, the latest iteration of msfs is in its infancy), by taking some time with the others simply reinforces how good overall we have it here. It's an easy thing to lose sight of amongst the clamoring of the torches-and-pitchforks mobs

Why would any business do that? Aviodev's time& effort have value, why simply throw that out half done, never to be compensated for what (if any) is done

True, and many of us do. I also have il2, but it rarely keeps me for long for some reason. The title refers to the fact I bought this in a moment of weakness, because it was going to be a hard pass for me until vr gets implemented. I got an additional 10-20 minutes of stick time last night ( crowded schedule and in-laws still gonna be here awhile) and I was able to do air starts (thanx MAXsenna) , all the points I made earlier are things 2020 reinforced that I prefer with dcs

Vr really is the cats pajamas, the bees knees- like I said, it was the hook that really brought me into vr. What I've found more important than FOV is clarity. Last I checked, monitors had a pretty limited fov as well, looking around is much more natural in vr tho My in-laws just moved back to the US from russia. I had Sergey, my father-in-law, flying around sochi in a mig19 and off the Kuz near batumi in the mi-8. One of the joys of dcs+vr is watching people experience it for the first time, it has much more of an effect on them than if they were staring at a monitor. I haven't gotten to dig into 2020 that much because we have guests staying with us, and after I finished installation, we had more guests coming for dinner but that touches on another thing I can appreciate about dcs- whatever we may complain about slow downloads on the days that everyone and their brother is updating dcs at the same time, it's still far better than the excruciating 15 hour installation process I had with 2020

You are once again making the same argument as with the GBU thread. That's the entire fundamental thrust of what you're doing in both instances, you're only considering certain physical characteristics of the munitions when there are more considerations of whether it's appropriate for the c-101 But there are those who do, and as I mentioned we depend on the devs research to be as correct as can be thru publicly available sources. We don't want to second guess the dev or have to do our own research to see what was a realistic loadout. I do fully support using that as a mod, and for whatever other munitions you like. Rescript the module to do whatever you like, I don't care... because with a mod, it's your active choice to depart reality. I thought I made myself clear on the first post, or the other thread. Hopefully this one does the job, but I have a feeling it wont

Sometimes you need to look elsewhere to really appreciate what u have (although I don't suggest this in marriage, spouses rarely take too kindly to such things) But I did manage to fly a few short flights...the inevitable "there's my house!" Flight, cuz orbx released the tacoma narrows airport which is very close to my house...but several things are already clear, and i want to talk about dcs, not msfs.... 1. I don't know how people flight sim without vr. Really, it's vr that's responsible for me getting as deeply into flight sims as I am. If not for vr, I'd still be playing video games and not flight sims Yes, msfs is photorealistic. I could identify my sailboat in my driveway...but looking at a monitor, I lost perhaps 90% of the immersion. I think anyone going from dcs vr to msfs on a monitor would agree. It just doesn't feel natural. For whatever detail dcs lacks, I prefer it any day of the week and twice on Sundays over a monitor 2. For all it's faults, I prefer the mission editor in dcs and the ability to share missions. Unless I'm missing something, I haven't seen an option to air start at some random location or on the ramp cold& dark. Maybe it's there. I had guests over , one who was from Rome. I would've liked to set him up in the air over time to fly around but the could only start at an airport nearby. In dcs mission editor, it's easy to change start position or even aircraft. ME can be counter intuitive, but I'm glad we have what we have. The alternative is much worse 3. There's a serious lack of a sense of purpose. This is important, in the army leadership was defined as providing purpose , direction, and motivation... We have that in the scenarios we create in dcs , or in trying to perfect the numerous systems in every aircraft. That's really lacking in msfs. It seems to be "sight seeing simulator", but I could be wrong. Perhaps there's some challenges, but certainly nothing like the campaigns we have, or any sense of progression 4. I haven't tried many, but it seems the aircraft are more simplistic. Handling was still a challenge when set to 'hard' but military aircraft by nature have many more systems to master . Compare the a-10c to 787. The smaller aircraft is still far more complex I don't think dcs has anything to worry about the newest iteration of msfs. It does bring a lot more people into the hobby, as the shortage of sim hardware can attest to. They may come to dcs looking for a bit more. Dcs is a couple feet wide but very deep. It may provide some good ideas where dcs may improve, but also I can see plenty of things I hope dcs never adopts. It has lotsa wow factor, but can't measure up to what we have here

What do you mean? I don't think there was a "or else" in this thread

Don't you think there might be a reason behind aviodev choosing which loadouts they allowed on the c-101? Are are you once again applying the "if it fits, it ships" philosophy to loadouts whether they were used IRL or not? Unlike the GBU-12s, it's a little harder to find who had what version of the missile was used by whom, and I prefer to be able to trust the dev's and not have to second guess the integrity of the info. The "helpful" additions made without any citation showing their use by any of the 4 c-101 operators muddies those waters It may be well intentioned, but you have demonstrated a disregard of whether a munition had been actually carried or not which throws the veracity of this addition into doubt. I see no issue with it being used as a mod...he'll, throw it up on the download section for ED... But I would hope the dev doesn't push that on the rest of us

I anticipated it wasn't, and i saw the thread on the russian forum is 160+pages long, (understandably so, the airframe has much greater significance there, and to a lesser extent spain,than anywhere else) i would say its safe to assume any issues here have been brought up there as well, but the module seems stagnant, as if it were released and dropped. I understand the language barriers: my first wife was german(i was stationed in Germany at the time). My in-laws from my second marriage are staying with us at the moment, they just arrived from russia the other day. I get communication even in a native language can be a challenge on the forums without having the nonverbal cues that add nuance to what we say...but still, google translate *is* a thing, and it can make it possible for plexus to read what people are saying here& for him to drop an occasional notice or acknowledgement I dont think anyones demanding the world, or the devs head on a platter like they are with Razbam , but really just a simple "heartbeat " that this aircraft is still alive or dev has moved onward to other projects

It seems he's washed his hands of the whole project, it's been out for how long now? I dont remember seeing anything of it showing up in the update love since it got released. Of course, since the dev isn't even active here, it's entirely possible he doesn't even know anything is missing or needs to be fixed.

And bought the new flight sim that shalt not be named. Perhaps it'll be done installing when I wake up tomorrow. I anticipate the content will be a mile wide but less than an inch deep. In any case, I'll be out only 3 hours worth of wages, and if it's like X- , I'll be reminded once more how much I like DCS

People may perceive a problem, but unless they're part of certain portions of ED, they don't have the big picture. There's plenty of information we're not privy to. They're only operating of suppositions and assumptions, and may most certainly be projecting issues where there are in fact none. I certainly don't see a problem with the status quo, and it would seem ED doesn't either.

Too bad PG wasn't a choice. Would be nice to have a campaign there

excellent response to the armchair CEOs. this should be an automated response whenever the inevitable business-advice-no one-asked-for/ subscription model/ end EA threads pop up like weeds thank you

Hopefully they won't, I'm sure they won't. Just because you don't use autostarts doesn't mean everyone else should confirm to your choice or else go to MAC . You don't leave any room for those with limited time or whose interests are on other complexities of the aircraft, but who see startups as monotonous. Don't like it? Don't use it, but it's selfish gatekeeping to wish it taken away from others

Nice! I've got a bit much on my plate at the moment to build a campaign. It's something Id like to do,or at least certainly would like to work with someone else on one Wish we had the f-4, and a lot more of Jordan so we could recreate this shot:

Not gonna happen, though, which is fine

:lol::megalol:

I know the feeling. Finally with Syria map we have at least one Jordanian air field and the ability to make "less contrived" scenarios

That reminds me of when I saw some truck driver simulator had a washington state dlc featuring my cancerous neighbor to the north, Seattle. The first thing I thought was "wow, now I can get home from my commute, fire up the computer and simulate sitting in traffic on the same strip of i-5 I just got off of!" Yep, I did a hard pass on that one