rrohde

I thought they are quite appropriate for a ground attack plane to a) see the damage done, and b) any AAA fire or missile trails coming your way during the climb out.

:thumbup:

Jo, das habe ich abgemessen (40cm lang) und dann von Monstertech so schneiden lassen.

Nothing wrong with having glare in a realistic fashion as done with the Viper...

DCS going Vulkan is in good company, along with Star Citizen, X4, X-plane, etc. There's a reason why a lot of heavy hitting studios go that route. I cannot wait. :)

+1 :thumbup:

Ah, I didn't know that either - thanks for pointing that out. Purchased the "DCS: NS 430 Navigation System for C-101СС by Eagle Dynamics / Aerges" :thumbup:

:thumbup:

That's a good call on ED's part, imho. :thumbup:

Yep, exactly. :thumbup:

+1 :thumbup:

Stunning map. Purchased as well.

+1 No struggle even in VR.

Isn't our Su-27 the "S" variant already? We need something a little more modern IMHO, such as the "SM" or "SM3" variant, or even better, the baseline Su-35 (or one of its its derivatives).

+1 :thumbup:

Thanks for your patience Bignewy. Some people, really, eh...?

AH-64 or AH-64D Longbow? ;)

+1 I always wondered why high fidelity DCS modules cost so little compared to other modules for certain civilian flight sims. So yeah, I would gladly pay more to support ED (and thus the longevity of my DCS passion). Bring it on. :)

The Naming of planes is a difficult matter, It isn’t just one of your holiday games; You may think at first I’m as mad as a hatter When I tell you, a plane must have THREE DIFFERENT NAMES.

A simple "Come again" option in the comms menu would also work wonders (for all in-cockpit comms). This would then simply replay the last message received (and could be re-used over and over again as needed). I remember asking for this many, many moons ago. :)

Or, what's already possible today - you could just map the "Show Pilot Body" option to your HOTAS, and toggle on/off as needed.

Ain't that the truth...? Well said for the rest of your post, too! :thumbup:

The fact that ED's DCS modules are getting more and more complex is great, but also problematic in terms of time spent learning all systems effectively. So yeah, I agree with OP. I could happily limit myself to only flying the F-18, F-16, Jeff, and the future Eurofighter, while stopping to purchase any other module that I will likely never get into (I prefer modern jets). However, I won't do that and will continue to buy every flyable DCS module and any new terrain that's coming out, just to keep everyone going - and thus sustaining my beloved DCS hobby as well. As a side note, as modern DCS modules tend to get more and more complex, and I really wish there was a lot more hand-holding via built-in training missions to teach us all those systems from the ground up (not talking about videos online, but actual training missions).

Interesting to think that you only chose 16GB RAM in 2020.... :) Personally, my next PC I am hopefully going to build towards the end of the year will have *at least* 64GB RAM (right now, I am running with 32GB RAM already).

Most armchair pilots are highly opinionated, and don't really know much about the real jets and their systems. Saying that something is "overpowered" pretty much means that they're looking at DCS as a game, rather than a simulation of real systems, and want for developers to "balance" it like a little online shooter. ;)