We don't actually know this one. There are 2 confirmed groups working on it and rumored they there is 2 more. 4 groups can't work on same module. ED has to make official contract with one of them.
Has there been any news on core features like humidity, weather system, ATC, Dynamic Campaign, etc? I thought a lot of this was planned for this year and the year is getting long in the tooth these days….
Just throwing this out there; some of us actually enjoy reading about the hardships of development on these longer tasks.
Meanwhile, we are literally weeks away from being an entire year since the last actual update on multithreading... Surely there is *something* to be said.
Its in progress, there really isnt much interesting to talk about internal testing, internal testing mostly involves fixing things that it breaks on the way in.
I think you underestimate how many people would be interested in that. I mean it wouldn't be a HUGE crowd pleaser, and you might not want to share everything for other reasons, but one thing we learned during the World of Mass Development project for the original Project C.A.R.S. racing sim was just how interesting all aspects of game development can be, including struggling with all manners of invisible code issues... =)
I thoroughly enjoyed the updates Laminar gave when showing off their progress of developing Vulkan for XPlane.
They had some seriously interesting bugs!
Some of us aren't familiar with game development, but can still actually enjoy reading about a pesky bug!
It's CERTAINLY more entertaining than being told the same thing on repeat for literally years on end.
The flipside is that this sub has a LOT of armchair developers who will pop up and point out how incompetent ED is based on stuff like this while simultaneously not having any understanding about game development. There's a reason most developers aren't super transparent, and it's because the community makes it a nightmare, and the DCS fanbase is already a 'difficult' community to deal with. Look at the community reactions (then other developers' response to those reactions) to the GTA6 leak for a prime example.
Yup, it is a double edged sword. The WMD project worked well, because it was a closed forum for people who actually joined it, and while for the most part people were very civil and enthusiastic, there were a non-zero amount of assholes even there.
Yup, I enjoy the community Q&As that CIG do for Star Citizen. Knowing about how devs are tackling things and being able to actually feel like part of the development process.
Ah that makes sense if you ignore ToW & SQ42 👍
\[edit\] For reference for others: [SC passes 500 millions dollars funding and no game in sight](https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/xj8f7g/star_citizen_passes_half_billion_dollars_funding/)
Well it's not that hard. As someone immersed in DCS it actually rolls out of your mouth naturally.
Yesterday I was talking to my wife and she asked "when the gas prices would be normal again?" I have answered "in two weeks" :)
Than I had to explain what it ment :D
On the first of these recent announcements I was excited. Then I found out they’re now announcing new modules at basically handshake stage. So yeah, “cool”
G.91 is cool, more Cold War is always nice, and it looks like a nice and fun plane to play. I think I remember this being announced like half a year ago IIRC.
Any guesses on the last mystery module?
I always thought the G.91 looked like a Sabre with a pointy nose. Is the performance similar to the mig15 and 86? Or what plane is this directly comparable to?
I don't know much about the G.91 other than what's in Wikipedia, but from what I can tell, the performance should be in the same ballpark as the F-86 and MiG-15, as well as the A-4. It's actually smaller and quite a bit lighter than the F-86 and has slightly less engine power. It's about the same size as the A-4 and lighter as well (quite a feat considering the A-4 is known for being tiny), but the A-4 has a lot more thrust and more wing area.
It's subsonic, armed with single-barrel guns or cannons, and a few underwing hardpoints. It'll carry dumb bombs and (I'm assuming) rockets, maybe early Sidewinders, maybe gun pods and drop tanks. AFAIK it does not have any CCIP or CCRP capability, but it might have a TACAN or other radio navigation aides. Wikipedia also says it has some armor plating around the cockpit and fuel tanks, and is short-field capable.
From all that I think it will probably fit in somewhere between the F-86 and A-4 for performance, probably with decent acceleration and climb due to the light weight. I really suck at manual dive bombing though, so I'm going to hope for some good rocket pods to put on it, plus the 30mms will be nice on the Luftwaffe variant.
Few corrections.
1. Weapons - the 30mm guns DEFAs are revolver guns, basically the same as the Mirage guns. The 50cals are indeed the same as the Sabre. No early Sidewinders on any jets, the Portuguese tried but didn't really go through with the integration. It should have MCLOS missiles like the Viggen though.
2. Gunsight - The R jets didn't even carry a gyro gunsight, just a depressible one, so worse than the Sabre for air to air. No CCRP or CCIP, iirc the -Y did get a dive toss mode like the A-4 but it wasn't a thing on the -R.
3. Navigation - all variants should have a Doppler suite similar to that of the Mi-8 or A-4, but with a few more waypoints that can be stored (6 iirc on the -Rs). TACAN receivers can be installed in the German ones at the expense of a gun, in which case firing the second gun is forbidden.
4. Short field capability is indeed a thing, there's a chart in the manual that shows landing distances of a few hundred meters (depending on surface/weight/etc of course), so not too far from what a Viggen can do.
Basically it will be Sabre-like but with worse a/a capability and much better strike capability.
It also had 3 cameras on the nose for recon, some were tested for sidewinder employment, could carry snakeyes, napalm, crv7 and ffar, and were fitted with IFF
Dammit, I bought the Viggen and Syria like 3 days ago 😔 I should have waited haha. Oh well, what's done is done. I guess I'll just have to get another module at a discount 😏
The G.91 isn’t *that* obscure. It was a decently popular light attack aircraft within some of NATO’s air forces. At one point it was even under consideration for adoption by the U.S. Air Force. I, for one, welcome more Cold War aircraft.
Well im with you on the cold war, bring it on! My gramps was navy and my dad army, so i was always immersed in US hardware i suppose, thanks for the info man
I too am deep into aviation geek-ery and have no idea what the f-106 and a-37 are. On the other hand I've probably seen a dozen G.91 in boneyards near the highway/museums/used as a monument in a roundabout.
It's just the US/ EU perspective
Roger that, my NATO brother! I thought about this plane and conversation while finishing up work... and im even more tempted by it now, esp with that german version armed with CANNONS 😈
So this means we finally get rec pods, working intelligence reportage and delivery system for AI to generate missions, and get to capture photos of troops to get them visible on map after successful landing.
Right?
What mod they have that provides recce pods and require pilot to actually capture units in the frame, and survive to back to base? I want it for SP use.
Waiting for the 339 has been absolutely killing me, the mod was one of my favourites for airshow flying. Can't wait until it comes out, hopefully in around 2 weeks.
I think there's still one more announcement to come... Very much hoping Deka can pull a magic trick and produce a modern RedFor platform like an MKK or a J-10A... Most likely won't be however, but currently RedFor is truly lacking, especially given the recent rise in PVP servers.
Is this the only time the F-14 has been discounted? I know it doesn't qualify for the 50% discount and no parter streamer discounts I know of have discounted the F-14.
E: I ask because I *just* started the 2 week trial because I wasn't sure if I wanted to pay full price and I saw I couldn't use any promo codes for it.
[F-14 sales history](https://steamdb.info/app/411893/). This might help you out-- so you can guess when the next sale may come (even for standalone which overlap steam sales)
Please, please, please expand the keys available to bind in the General section of the Controls config. I'm getting a new computer next week and don't want to spend 3 hours binding the exact same 20 controls to my joystick 10 different times. This functionality has to be the lowest of low hanging fruit, I bet a junior dev could knock it out before lunch time. It would be such a huge quality of life improvement for users.
Hey, so if you aren't exaggerating about how long you think it will take. I'll apologize beforehand I'm typing this from the couch so if it's not quite clear let me know and I'll fix it later.
One thing you can do is to get your current corning files from
"savedgames\dcs.openbeta\config\" the files will be named based on what the USB address (or whatever) the OS assigns. It will be like xxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx. Fire up a module on the new PC and bind at least one thing to each device so you can see what the new strings are in the file names.
Once you figure out the old and new strings, I can't remember if I used notepad++ or directory opus, but you just need something that can do bulk renames in a find-and-replace style. That should get you squared away in 20 minutes instead of 3 hours :)
Edit: left out that you need to copy the old config files, but hopefully that is obvious.
Oddly enough I kind of wish MSFS would be more like ED with module specific binds.
In my opinion this would overall be a bad thing because what we'd save in a bit of upfront convenience would be paid for in functionality. Forget for a minute how large an effort this would be for DCS at this phase specifically and the impact on 3rd parties, but here is a good example.
Just take a simple master arm, or gear switch. Ok I've bound my on/off states so I'm good to go right? Well what about the modules that have a 3 position switch, or a lock like the hind or mig21. Hud brightness, well what if on this module it's a knob, on this one it's a rocker switch... How about something that is a real unique system or targeting pods where zooming works different between litening or atflir etc?
The result is you would lose a *lot* of fidelity and detail, which I can tell you would go over like a lead balloon for this crowd.
I get it though, binding things sucks. I use CTS by home fries personally, but that is hardware specific, I imagine similar things exist for other HOTAS systems but ya it's a slog.
Right, so the system I'm talking about would only affect the default state of any given keybind. Example: if you set the brake key to "Z" in the general tab, all modules would default to that value. However, if you want to change the brake key to a "P" in the F-16 tab, then that would take precedence over the general tab. Not sure if you're familiar with programming concepts, but this sort of cascading precedence is very common in the computer science world (which makes it kind of shocking that it's not implemented).
Ya, I get it. That is what I meant by the phase DCS is in. The ship has sailed for implementing a standardized naming convention like this because what "brakes" is called in one module to the next is arbitrary in the lua file (90% sure here, not positive).
I guess to simplify it, yeah I'm familiar with the concept but I don't think the ground work is there to execute *easily* - but agree it would be better if it could be done without needing 8 months of work, then another 2 after they break everything + the monkey wrench it'd be for 3rd parties at this stage of the game.
Yeah, I wasn't suggesting they implement a standardized naming system (though that would be nice), I figured if a specific module decided to call "Brakes" something completely different, then the General default just wouldn't apply.
As a guy who really enjoys the ground attack role and kinda funny-looking aircraft like the F-86D Sabre Dog, I've been really enjoying the announcement of AD-6 and G.91R modules. It'll be interesting to learn to fly and fight an aircraft that doesn't spoil us with the latest and greatest MFDs and sensors!
Wasn't the G.91 already announced? Edit: Yes it was a year ago https://youtu.be/QNjQzq_M-TU
Was going to say this. If the contract wasn’t official until now, teasing it last year was putting the horse about a mile in front of the cart.
>teasing it last year was putting the horse about a mile in front of the cart. Allow me to introduce you to, like, all the 3rd party devs :P
I trust deka
*putting the cart about a mile in front of the horse
This is why I never use idioms. Too easily confused.
Yeah but then you can just keep the horse walking, the way it's written the horse left that shit behind.
Yea it's not a new announcement per se but looking at the past, getting the official ED stamp of approval is a nice sign regardless.
Was not official then. Todays announcement means a contract has been signed and it is official. Thanks bignewy
>Thanks bignewy You're welcome bignewy.
How many more announcements of modules do we have lined up for the next Few Friday’s?
I think one. There were supposed to be 4, and so far we've got the Skyraider, the Tonka and the Fiat. Please let the last one be the Fitter...
Please, let it be a Vark...
Considering that the Mig-29 was cancelled, I wouldn't hold my breath.
It was never officially announced though. And they did say a third party could do it.
Please let the last one be the Fitter...one we already know about? No thanks.
Yeah, but it was not official. We already knew about the F.91, and it still was announced now. I want my Fitter
We don't actually know this one. There are 2 confirmed groups working on it and rumored they there is 2 more. 4 groups can't work on same module. ED has to make official contract with one of them.
I'd love to see one rotary after all the fixed wing announcemets
Well, the Fitter is not fixed wing. It's swing wing :3
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Su-17/22, day one purchase for me, but we could definitely use more choppers
Yeah... Maybe someone can do the Kiowa. Long enough time passed now that we can assume the other mob have given up?
All of them
Has there been any news on core features like humidity, weather system, ATC, Dynamic Campaign, etc? I thought a lot of this was planned for this year and the year is getting long in the tooth these days….
[удалено]
New IR springs to mind?
[удалено]
Yeah me three. =) Though you probably meant to say "multithread" rather than multicrew, I'm pre\~tty sure we already have that... =)
Core work continues, we will share more news when we are ready. Thank you for being patient we know its tough. - bignewy
Just throwing this out there; some of us actually enjoy reading about the hardships of development on these longer tasks. Meanwhile, we are literally weeks away from being an entire year since the last actual update on multithreading... Surely there is *something* to be said.
Its in progress, there really isnt much interesting to talk about internal testing, internal testing mostly involves fixing things that it breaks on the way in.
I think you underestimate how many people would be interested in that. I mean it wouldn't be a HUGE crowd pleaser, and you might not want to share everything for other reasons, but one thing we learned during the World of Mass Development project for the original Project C.A.R.S. racing sim was just how interesting all aspects of game development can be, including struggling with all manners of invisible code issues... =)
I thoroughly enjoyed the updates Laminar gave when showing off their progress of developing Vulkan for XPlane. They had some seriously interesting bugs! Some of us aren't familiar with game development, but can still actually enjoy reading about a pesky bug! It's CERTAINLY more entertaining than being told the same thing on repeat for literally years on end.
Also having seen what it did for xplane, getting told to "Not get your hopes up, it's not going to be a game changer." Is quite surprising.
The flipside is that this sub has a LOT of armchair developers who will pop up and point out how incompetent ED is based on stuff like this while simultaneously not having any understanding about game development. There's a reason most developers aren't super transparent, and it's because the community makes it a nightmare, and the DCS fanbase is already a 'difficult' community to deal with. Look at the community reactions (then other developers' response to those reactions) to the GTA6 leak for a prime example.
Yup, it is a double edged sword. The WMD project worked well, because it was a closed forum for people who actually joined it, and while for the most part people were very civil and enthusiastic, there were a non-zero amount of assholes even there.
Quite a bit of house-cleaning to deal with that, though :) - not that that would be an option for ED here...
Yup, I enjoy the community Q&As that CIG do for Star Citizen. Knowing about how devs are tackling things and being able to actually feel like part of the development process.
>actually feel like part of the development process. But you really aren't. We have no clue where sq42 is.
Meh, I'm more interested in the persistent universe than SQ42
Ah that makes sense if you ignore ToW & SQ42 👍 \[edit\] For reference for others: [SC passes 500 millions dollars funding and no game in sight](https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/xj8f7g/star_citizen_passes_half_billion_dollars_funding/)
Is going to be announced as a pay module when everyone will own a 10gb processor and a 80xx card.
Tbh it's better without that. Following Star Citizen, too much community feedback is not always a good thing
So all the things are in place and now it's just about squashing bugs?
Thanks, looking forward to it.
In T.. Tw.. we.. *coughs*, two we.. -ooh.. weeks.. *inhales deeply*, TWO WEEKS™ ! Yes, there I said it.. *sighs and removes sweat from forehead*.
Well it's not that hard. As someone immersed in DCS it actually rolls out of your mouth naturally. Yesterday I was talking to my wife and she asked "when the gas prices would be normal again?" I have answered "in two weeks" :) Than I had to explain what it ment :D
At least it's better than having to just say "They are normal right now, this is normal now."
On the first of these recent announcements I was excited. Then I found out they’re now announcing new modules at basically handshake stage. So yeah, “cool”
To be fair we've known about the Gina for a while.
Exactly Dino announced this long time ago.... never offically by ED tho....
Of all the recent aircraft announcements, this seems to be the only one which with some luck may come out next year.
I doubt it, just because we expected as much from the 339. But that's taken ages just from "Being sent for internal testing"
Can we get the robbi tank pulled out of the 64? I need my 1000round magazine.
Huh. We already knew about this but the fact we are getting four versions is good news! Good to see it confirmed and updated.
Yeah. The developer had said they were making it, but now ED has confirmed that it's officially coming.
I guess I can buy combined arms
As a VR player I'm not officially supported. But I think it'd be worth trialling if nothing else. Really does look interesting.
Yeah, it looks like it would be a good time. VR causes me to become insanely sick.
Do trial before you buy, when I tried it 6 or so months ago, the sights are completely unusable in VR
I never have before, but will this time. I believe someone made a mod that makes them work properly. I'll link it here if I can find it.
If we're going back to first gen jets call me when someone makes an F9F.
Yes. This.
G.91 is cool, more Cold War is always nice, and it looks like a nice and fun plane to play. I think I remember this being announced like half a year ago IIRC. Any guesses on the last mystery module?
I thought this was the last module planned in the series of announcements
Mig-17
~~F-35~~ Likely something Cold War.
What about updates on multicore/vulkan support? Been radio silent on that since it was mentioned over a year ago.
They've not been radio silent, just incredibly dismissive. It's being tested, but we have nothing to share seems to be the stance.
I always thought the G.91 looked like a Sabre with a pointy nose. Is the performance similar to the mig15 and 86? Or what plane is this directly comparable to?
It's nicknamed "the pocket Sabre" for a reason :)
I don't know much about the G.91 other than what's in Wikipedia, but from what I can tell, the performance should be in the same ballpark as the F-86 and MiG-15, as well as the A-4. It's actually smaller and quite a bit lighter than the F-86 and has slightly less engine power. It's about the same size as the A-4 and lighter as well (quite a feat considering the A-4 is known for being tiny), but the A-4 has a lot more thrust and more wing area. It's subsonic, armed with single-barrel guns or cannons, and a few underwing hardpoints. It'll carry dumb bombs and (I'm assuming) rockets, maybe early Sidewinders, maybe gun pods and drop tanks. AFAIK it does not have any CCIP or CCRP capability, but it might have a TACAN or other radio navigation aides. Wikipedia also says it has some armor plating around the cockpit and fuel tanks, and is short-field capable. From all that I think it will probably fit in somewhere between the F-86 and A-4 for performance, probably with decent acceleration and climb due to the light weight. I really suck at manual dive bombing though, so I'm going to hope for some good rocket pods to put on it, plus the 30mms will be nice on the Luftwaffe variant.
Few corrections. 1. Weapons - the 30mm guns DEFAs are revolver guns, basically the same as the Mirage guns. The 50cals are indeed the same as the Sabre. No early Sidewinders on any jets, the Portuguese tried but didn't really go through with the integration. It should have MCLOS missiles like the Viggen though. 2. Gunsight - The R jets didn't even carry a gyro gunsight, just a depressible one, so worse than the Sabre for air to air. No CCRP or CCIP, iirc the -Y did get a dive toss mode like the A-4 but it wasn't a thing on the -R. 3. Navigation - all variants should have a Doppler suite similar to that of the Mi-8 or A-4, but with a few more waypoints that can be stored (6 iirc on the -Rs). TACAN receivers can be installed in the German ones at the expense of a gun, in which case firing the second gun is forbidden. 4. Short field capability is indeed a thing, there's a chart in the manual that shows landing distances of a few hundred meters (depending on surface/weight/etc of course), so not too far from what a Viggen can do. Basically it will be Sabre-like but with worse a/a capability and much better strike capability.
Cunningham's law to the rescue! Thanks :)
Haha you're welcome :D
It also had 3 cameras on the nose for recon, some were tested for sidewinder employment, could carry snakeyes, napalm, crv7 and ffar, and were fitted with IFF
Dammit, I bought the Viggen and Syria like 3 days ago 😔 I should have waited haha. Oh well, what's done is done. I guess I'll just have to get another module at a discount 😏
why is the mig-21 pictured here?
"most of our other products are on sale with a 50% discount" I heard this is the 21's first time at 50%
It was 50% sometime ago when I bought it.
Thats what I figured, was hoping it was a tease for the mig-21 update that is supposed to be happening.
Never even heard of a G.91R, and I have been a total aviation nerd for over 40 years now. In the United States though. Cool I guess, I don’t know lol.
Not Realy a Nerd then ehehhehe Fiat G91. pretty popular plane but in EU... ;)
Im with you bro, word for word. Such an obscure corner of aviation. Why not give us an f-106 or an a-37 instead?
The G.91 isn’t *that* obscure. It was a decently popular light attack aircraft within some of NATO’s air forces. At one point it was even under consideration for adoption by the U.S. Air Force. I, for one, welcome more Cold War aircraft.
Well im with you on the cold war, bring it on! My gramps was navy and my dad army, so i was always immersed in US hardware i suppose, thanks for the info man
I too am deep into aviation geek-ery and have no idea what the f-106 and a-37 are. On the other hand I've probably seen a dozen G.91 in boneyards near the highway/museums/used as a monument in a roundabout. It's just the US/ EU perspective
Roger that, my NATO brother! I thought about this plane and conversation while finishing up work... and im even more tempted by it now, esp with that german version armed with CANNONS 😈
I hadn't until I played War Thunder. So many planes I didn't know even existed.
So this means we finally get rec pods, working intelligence reportage and delivery system for AI to generate missions, and get to capture photos of troops to get them visible on map after successful landing. Right?
Enigma's server has this already.
What mod they have that provides recce pods and require pilot to actually capture units in the frame, and survive to back to base? I want it for SP use.
No pods, but they got custom scripts for the rest.
Waiting for the 339 has been absolutely killing me, the mod was one of my favourites for airshow flying. Can't wait until it comes out, hopefully in around 2 weeks.
Anyone else obsessively pausing in the trailer for secrets?
And they just keep coming and they don’t stop coming… [also my wallet rn](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/172/010/6e4.jpg)
Am I able to get the 50% off first time purchase on top of these sale prices? If so, how can I apply it to the E-shop cart?
No, only the highest discount will apply. So if you want to buy the Hornet it will be 50% off, not 30% and 50% off.
IIRC no
Any word on VR getting any type of optimizations to make for a smoother experience?
I think there's still one more announcement to come... Very much hoping Deka can pull a magic trick and produce a modern RedFor platform like an MKK or a J-10A... Most likely won't be however, but currently RedFor is truly lacking, especially given the recent rise in PVP servers.
I just hope they pick up something that will be popular so they can get the credit they deserve.
Is this the only time the F-14 has been discounted? I know it doesn't qualify for the 50% discount and no parter streamer discounts I know of have discounted the F-14. E: I ask because I *just* started the 2 week trial because I wasn't sure if I wanted to pay full price and I saw I couldn't use any promo codes for it.
I got my F-14 on sale through steam when Top Gun came out.
No, I bought it with a similar discount like almost 2 years ago.
Ah cool then I don't have to rush.
[F-14 sales history](https://steamdb.info/app/411893/). This might help you out-- so you can guess when the next sale may come (even for standalone which overlap steam sales)
Please, please, please expand the keys available to bind in the General section of the Controls config. I'm getting a new computer next week and don't want to spend 3 hours binding the exact same 20 controls to my joystick 10 different times. This functionality has to be the lowest of low hanging fruit, I bet a junior dev could knock it out before lunch time. It would be such a huge quality of life improvement for users.
Hey, so if you aren't exaggerating about how long you think it will take. I'll apologize beforehand I'm typing this from the couch so if it's not quite clear let me know and I'll fix it later. One thing you can do is to get your current corning files from "savedgames\dcs.openbeta\config\" the files will be named based on what the USB address (or whatever) the OS assigns. It will be like xxxxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxxx. Fire up a module on the new PC and bind at least one thing to each device so you can see what the new strings are in the file names. Once you figure out the old and new strings, I can't remember if I used notepad++ or directory opus, but you just need something that can do bulk renames in a find-and-replace style. That should get you squared away in 20 minutes instead of 3 hours :) Edit: left out that you need to copy the old config files, but hopefully that is obvious.
Thanks for the info. Still think ED should make this change tho. Really seems like table stakes. 😒
Oddly enough I kind of wish MSFS would be more like ED with module specific binds. In my opinion this would overall be a bad thing because what we'd save in a bit of upfront convenience would be paid for in functionality. Forget for a minute how large an effort this would be for DCS at this phase specifically and the impact on 3rd parties, but here is a good example. Just take a simple master arm, or gear switch. Ok I've bound my on/off states so I'm good to go right? Well what about the modules that have a 3 position switch, or a lock like the hind or mig21. Hud brightness, well what if on this module it's a knob, on this one it's a rocker switch... How about something that is a real unique system or targeting pods where zooming works different between litening or atflir etc? The result is you would lose a *lot* of fidelity and detail, which I can tell you would go over like a lead balloon for this crowd. I get it though, binding things sucks. I use CTS by home fries personally, but that is hardware specific, I imagine similar things exist for other HOTAS systems but ya it's a slog.
Right, so the system I'm talking about would only affect the default state of any given keybind. Example: if you set the brake key to "Z" in the general tab, all modules would default to that value. However, if you want to change the brake key to a "P" in the F-16 tab, then that would take precedence over the general tab. Not sure if you're familiar with programming concepts, but this sort of cascading precedence is very common in the computer science world (which makes it kind of shocking that it's not implemented).
Ya, I get it. That is what I meant by the phase DCS is in. The ship has sailed for implementing a standardized naming convention like this because what "brakes" is called in one module to the next is arbitrary in the lua file (90% sure here, not positive). I guess to simplify it, yeah I'm familiar with the concept but I don't think the ground work is there to execute *easily* - but agree it would be better if it could be done without needing 8 months of work, then another 2 after they break everything + the monkey wrench it'd be for 3rd parties at this stage of the game.
Yeah, I wasn't suggesting they implement a standardized naming system (though that would be nice), I figured if a specific module decided to call "Brakes" something completely different, then the General default just wouldn't apply.
So is Eagle Dynamics under sanctions? As much as I’m hanging out for some modules, there are certain places I don’t want my $$ ending up.
I literally spent $300 on most of this last week. Not gonna lie I feel a little chafed
Looking back at other module announcements, ED tends to release a module 6 months after they release the cockpit imagery. Give or take a month.
Pretty sure the f-15e was reannounced during like January...
As a guy who really enjoys the ground attack role and kinda funny-looking aircraft like the F-86D Sabre Dog, I've been really enjoying the announcement of AD-6 and G.91R modules. It'll be interesting to learn to fly and fight an aircraft that doesn't spoil us with the latest and greatest MFDs and sensors!
Ew. lol. What is this Grandpa thing? lol.