May 24th Update Discussion

[TimeKilla]

Pay up :music_whistling:

 

:megalol:

[cichlidfan]

Ok. Now, when you do a clean install like that, you have to reinstall any modules you've purchased (FC3, A-10C, etc.) using the module manager in DCS World. Am I correct? So, doesn't this use up one of your permitted installations? For example, I had started with 10 installations for FC3. Now, I think I have 8 left. I'd hate to use them up every time a new version of DCS World comes out.

 

Yes, I do reinstall the modules after installing DCS World. If you have the complete module locally and the version is the exact same as World, then you do not need to use the module manager (I have looked at it but never installed anything from it). You just run the executable for each module.

 

No method of reinstalling should use an activation all long as your registry keys are left intact. I still have most of my activations (lost a couple due to forgetting to deactivate before a Windows reinstall) for DCS A-10C and I have been updating/reinstalling that for over two years now.

[cichlidfan]

Can I Borrow $50 to send to you?

 

 

There is also the trolling fine for making the statement in the first place. ;)

[rrohde]

Wags, please do not limit your updates to facebook... us Google+ users would appreciate that as well. Thanks.

[schkorpio]

Wags, please do not limit your updates to facebook... us Google+ users would appreciate that as well. Thanks.

 

I also hope someone will be nice enough to duplicate the facebook/google+ posts on the forums here they are blocked at work for me! :P

[kontiuka]

Yes, I do reinstall the modules after installing DCS World. If you have the complete module locally and the version is the exact same as World, then you do not need to use the module manager (I have looked at it but never installed anything from it). You just run the executable for each module.

 

No method of reinstalling should use an activation all long as your registry keys are left intact. I still have most of my activations (lost a couple due to forgetting to deactivate before a Windows reinstall) for DCS A-10C and I have been updating/reinstalling that for over two years now.

 

ok. Thanks much.

[chaos]

Nice updates, the news on EDGE/Terrain is a little disconcerting to not have insight into the code baseline for an entire year but glad to hear that work hasn't stalled on it though!

 

I was a bit surprised by that as well... especially since we were shown some screenshots and that video of the terrain more than a year ago. To be honest, the few pics we have are nothing short of amazing and I wonder if they went 'a bridge too far'. Possibly had to re-do the whole thing on a more realistic scale? Anyways, it's a brand new graphics/terrain engine so delays were to be expected. Safe to say it is a long ways off...

 

I do appreciate the updates. One of the things I look forward to on a Friday :-)

[Mistermann]

I'm not much of a facebook fan myself, but if it helps to "spread the love" then i'm by all means go get 'em!

 

I completely agree. The forums here are for the hardcore people that have already committed great time and resources to ED and DCS. To me, the FB community is a land of opportunity for ED. I applaud them for expanding their reach and hope it is successful as it brings in additional revenues and keeps the DCS engine running.

 

I expect that sites like FB will be marketing "awareness" engines for ED and this forum will remain the main source of detailed knowledge.

[Phantom88]

Ohh,That Mi8 is looking "Sexy":D Thank You for The update:thumbup:Would love to hear progress on Dora/Nevada in future updates:)

Cheers!

[badger66]

"Before moving on to DCS version 1.2.5, we plan on one more update to 1.2.4 with a focus on resolving bugs that are having the biggest impact on gameplay. Chizh and I (with tester input) have scoured the bugs and problems sub-forums and created a list of the most common complaints / bug reports. Our goal is to wrap up 1.2.4 in such a way that we have a very solid foundation for 1.2.5. Once I have a change log, I hope to post it prior to version release".

 

 

This is the best bit of info for me in this latest update .

[Tone71]

"Before moving on to DCS version 1.2.5, we plan on one more update to 1.2.4 with a focus on resolving bugs that are having the biggest impact on gameplay. Chizh and I (with tester input) have scoured the bugs and problems sub-forums and created a list of the most common complaints / bug reports. Our goal is to wrap up 1.2.4 in such a way that we have a very solid foundation for 1.2.5. Once I have a change log, I hope to post it prior to version release".

 

 

This is the best bit of info for me in this latest update .

 

I hope this means eliminating the slideshow whenever my Shark fires rockets...

[Razorback]

Very good news but I really don't understand the strategy of "Utility" helicopters ?

 

Most of Sim community has asked for the Mil-Mi-24 HIND, a real combat helicopter and in few months the Huey and now the HIP, two transport helicopter with a limited numbers of mission or combat capacity....

 

Please give us a real "beast" !!!! The Mil-Mi 24 HIND (version F, G, ...or higher)

[sorcer3r]

Very good news but I really don't understand the strategy of "Utility" helicopters ?

 

Most of Sim community has asked for the Mil-Mi-24 HIND, a real combat helicopter and in few months the Huey and now the HIP, two transport helicopter with a limited numbers of mission or combat capacity....

 

Please give us a real "beast" !!!! The Mil-Mi 24 HIND (version F, G, ...or higher)

 

UH-1 is the "base" for AH-1

 

Mi-8 is the "base" for Mi-24.

[Razorback]

UH-1 is the "base" for AH-1

 

Mi-8 is the "base" for Mi-24.

 

Sorry but the base of what ?

UH-1 is realy not the same as AH-1 (graphics, weaponnery, missions, cockpit design, tactics and even flight model)

Yes you can find some common points but I thing those above are the more representative for an helicopter...

 

Same remarks for the Mi-8/24...

[TZeer]

With "base" I think he mean that it's easier to make and implement the UH-1 and Mi-8 first to gain experience, then diving straight into a more complex platform as the AH-1 and Mi-24.

[ALDEGA]

Sorry but the base of what ?

 

The Bell AH-1 Cobra (company designation: Model 209) is a two-bladed, single engine attack helicopter manufactured by Bell Helicopter. It shares a common engine, transmission and rotor system with the older UH-1 Iroquois. The AH-1 is also referred to as the HueyCobra or Snake.

 

The core of the aircraft was derived from the Mil Mi-8 (NATO reporting name "Hip"): two top-mounted turboshaft engines driving a mid-mounted 17.3 m five-blade main rotor and a three-blade tail rotor.

.

[Dudester22]

Very good news but I really don't understand the strategy of "Utility" helicopters ?

 

Most of Sim community has asked for the Mil-Mi-24 HIND, a real combat helicopter and in few months the Huey and now the HIP, two transport helicopter with a limited numbers of mission or combat capacity....

 

Please give us a real "beast" !!!! The Mil-Mi 24 HIND (version F, G, ...or higher)

 

Funny you say this because I felt the same about the P-51D. After the A10C was released, I thought it would make more sense to then maybe do the Su -25, and then say two fighter jets. At the momment it's A10C vs the p-51D vs the UH-1H Huey. That's ok for coops, but no good for player v player combat in my opinion.

 

I also hope the news about edge is that it is nearly ready for release, before I grow old.

[ishtmail]

I must say I like the Poll idea that Wags put out, I'm just not certain that a Facebook poll is the way to go. ED's FB page has 2000 likes, which is not exactly a representative sample of the fanbase.

In that regard, a Poll on the forums would be more sensibe (the forums have 43.000 registered members), and I'm not sure even here would give an accurate representation of what people in general really want (face it, casual gamers just aren't active on forums like this, meaning only hardcore sim freaks post regularly, which would push the poll results considerably in favor of the hardcore modules).

[SkateZilla]

i didnt know quoting Wiki as a Valid/Viable source was allowed....

 

to that respect, the AH-1 was basically a attack version of the UH-1, they slimmed out the frame, moved the seats to be inline, etc etc etc.... I just watched a long documentary on the Huey yesterday.

[Squid_DK]

I think with base was meant that the original AH-1 was based on transmission and engine of the UH-1, likewise the MI-24 is based on an improved and modified Mi-8

Edited May 26, 2013 by Danish_Squid
Adding a line

[Dudikoff]

to that respect, the AH-1 was basically a attack version of the UH-1, they slimmed out the frame, moved the seats to be inline, etc etc etc....

 

IMHO, that's a gross overstatement. If they share the same engine, rotor system and the transmission (to speed up the development and save up on the maintenance cost), does it really make one an attack version of the other? I mean, the entire fuselage is different apart from maybe the tail part (which seems to be almost reused due to the same transmission and rotor system)..

[Dejjvid]

The fuselage is the easy part of an helicopter.

[NineLine]

The first one always makes the next one easier, but that doesnt mean the next one wont have its own set of challenges.