Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sc_neo

  1. So my feelings on the new forum have not changed much and i still prefer the old visual style/coulour scheme and hope you add this back as an option. Again, i am not in the least asking for a rollback since a modernisation under the hood is a good thing. But: i surely have noticed me not coming here as frequently as i did because the individual subforums are a blackbox now. And this "latest active" thread being displayed right next to the subforum tab was really the appetizer to go and check out stuff. Actually, it would be cool if there could be three latest threads that are being displayed for every subforum. Or maybe add a "hover-over-popup" that displays the contents of a subforum so we can see whats up before clicking. So take your time and enhance incrementally!
  2. So i feared that i would come! I am a bit angry withmyself since i have heard of a new forum being in development for quite some time and i didn't write a post why and what was so great about the old forum. Let me state this here: The old forum was once of the most efficient and eye pleasing forums and this was a big reason why it "wasted" way too much time on a daily basis because it allowed for a perfect flow from top to bottom to first read the news and general 2.5 stuff, then glance over my owned modules and the happenings therem, then 3rd parties and the mods section etc. The way the new forum is layed out, too much info is hidden behind the subforums and i am not really enticed to go look. But even if some things were a bit dated and i fully understand that the forum needed changes under the hood, the user facing side was near perfect from a cognitive-perception perspective, as well as from a order-flow perspective. I can only encourage the web devs here to try to recreate the old forums look and feel and way of navigation as close on the new backbone as they can. Then, start inplementeing incremental change that improves on the shortcomings. So i try to list what would like to see reappear: - overall colour scheme. I don't wear pruple in RL but that bluish grey and purple was quite unique, eye-pleasing and had a very good contrast. I would really like to have an exact replica of that style as an option. - Yes, the vertical top-level layout meant a bit of scrolling, but it was way faster than the new style since your eyes didn't new to jump around needleslly trying to pinpoint whats where. Stuff was just scrolling downwards under your gaze. And that vertical style allowed for the last changed thread to be displayed. Absolutely perfect, i don't know any other forum that did this so well as the old DCS forum. -easy acces to the last post you have actually looked at so you can read on from where you left of before -And the one thing i really thought needed improvement; the way images/screenshots where displayed has actually not been addressed as far as i can see. There i would hope the new web tech would allow for displaying them full screen without having to click them first. Thats the first round of things i noticed and would like be worked on/changed. Cheers
  3. Got it. Thanks for clearing this up. Looking foward to it!
  4. One last question: from what you are saying i infer that the "new cockpit" (mesh and textures?) is (uncertain atm) quite some time away and not something that might be finished by the end of this year? Just trying to manage my expections so i can start enjoying what i have right now in the sim :)
  5. Oho that sounds incredible. Did you establish the laser scanning tech already and access to a good real world model is all that is required?
  6. I see what you mean, but is that what was meant with phase 2 cockpit update or is this still something to come?
  7. In the DCS newsletter from 4th September there was a dev update for the Mig-21. See https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4477190&postcount=269 It there says: "Most importantly a long awaited update to the cockpit mesh was finalised, which substantially improved the precision of cockpit geometry. This will be particularly appreciated by VR users." Has this been already released without me noticing or is this something to come at a later point?
  8. I hope that once the art side of things on the Mi-24 Hind is done the artist moves over to give the same treatment as done for the Blackshark to the Mi-8. Would kinda make perfect sense since Mi-24 and Mi-8 are drom the same family of russian helos.
  9. I actually wanted to propose something along the lines like an "integrated bug and feature" tracker that would be binding for ED and third parties to populate before EA and keep updated with each patch. An expandle/collapsable list that contains all highlevel features. Klicking on a feature opens a list with all subfeatures where the devs have the option to annotate the various implementation states like missing/partially implemented/placeholder/fully completed etc. shortly explain whats what. A subfeature can then further expanded to display a bugsection which can be edited and populated by the community as well. This could be a one-shop-stop where everyone can grasp at one glance: 1. Which features have been promised 2. What are the exact subfeatures and what is there current state of implementeation 3. What bugs have been submitted in each sub-feature section. This way it would be super easy to find out wether something is a bug posted by a community member, or wether something is not working as described in the manual because a feature is not yet fully implemented, waiting on some other engine tech upgrade, or is a bit shallow because ....you know "sekrit" :) As we all know; right now a user has to hunt the store page, maybe a status thread in a modules forum section, various bug reports threads, check reddit and discord channels to get an overview of a modules current state. This is the most tiring part of EA. Its not the time it takes for modules to be fully completed, but the lack of knowledge whats going on which i feel is due to the lack of a central, authoritave place where all features and bugs are collected.
  10. Come on guys; at the pace that you keep it coming no one can actually manage this properly. Ron has put out his initial post and now it takes some time for him and his team and ED's mods to work through that list of "feature grievances" we have been bugging about. It is good that many have insisted on this, so that Bignewy and 9line grasp that this particular issue must be sufficiently addressed. But it surely takes time for them to get a hold of all those feature issues, and then sometime to comeup with a battle plan that works for Razbam and satisfies the communities needs. One more thing; if i could choose between the Harrier returning to EA and ED retreating to a handsoff approach OR Harrier out of EA i.e. released lable on it but ED taking on a bigger role in ensuring product completion and polishing and community comms, i surely take the latter. Because the way it was before is definetly worse i.e. practically no comms here, no up-to-date roadmap, uncertain timeframe when this module will become study sim. Chances that we get on here have never been better as far as i can recall.
  11. @Prowler Thanks for coming back to the forums and updating us on the current development process for the Harrier from the last couple of months! Highly appreciated! And i am exited like the next guy to read about the improvements with VGS maps etc. and your post was detailing well what difficulties your team faces in regards to DCS legacy code (as does ED too of course) that you kinda need to "refurbish" multiple systems during development. Now i can see that some of the main issues about important features like the ARBS etc. that members here have been very vocal about have yet not been addressed in your initial post. I have read on your discord that the "magical" ARBS for instance is not as realistic as can be due to DCS engine limitations in processing the required ARBS calculations. This is the kind of info we need here on the forums with a bit more explanation and prospect of what needed to change from ED's for this to be implemented in a satisfactory manner. I thus politely ask and ecourage you to update us one by one on the major features states (like the aforementioned ARBS), what is right and/or wrong about it, missing and delineate if this is due to stuff not yet implemented in DCS's engine or something else. Again, thanks for responding to some of the concerns and i hope you guys will make a somewhat regular appearance here so we can get the issues worked out and have a as feature complete, bugfree and premier Harrier as can be. Cheers!
  12. So the last proper update to the Harrier was on 15th July 2020. I would actually assume that moving a product from EA to release would be a milestone, i.e. a boatload of features and fixes that makes the concerning module pretty bug free and complete. Which features belong in the EA and "maintainance" phase is debatable of course. So my question is: what has changed since the 15th of July so that the Harrier is now ready to go from EA to release? Why the change now and not 2 months ago? With all the information that is accesbile right now, this looks really like moving the goalposts here. Even more so then when ED moved features up and down for the F/A-18 and introduced that new concept of EA AND then maintainace phase earlier this year. I feel for how difficult it must be to balance multiple projects over extended periods of time. But this here seems to me to be in stark contrast to what Razbam's intention was with "no more releases before we finish our existing three modules". Likely in a couple of weeks the release promo for the F-15 will ramp up and questions about the Mirage and Harrier will be answered with...."they are out of EA, please move on".
  13. Hey, so the standalone DLC Red Falg campaign is still part of DCS World and every time i start up DCS the module manager reminds me to install it. Since the campaign is now part of the Viggen module, this standalone version is superflous and can be removed. Please be so kind and remind ED again to remove it.
  14. This really looks phenomenal! Once that thing is finished and released and your are happy with your work....i'll wait a couple of months until i can't resist any longer an start lobbying you to do the same for the Hornet and maybe later the Harrier. :) This looks so well thought out....like some stew that has been cookingfor 30+ hours.
  15. My guess is that the A-10cII will catch up pricewise with the Viper and Hornet weighing in at 80 dollars. And the 20 price difference to the current 60 might be what current owners will need to spend to upgrad to that new version.
  16. This looks amazing! I hope this won't give ED's artists sleepless nights in regards to the upcoming A-10c II weathered cockpit ;) Btw. When you are building the final mod, putting it all together, can you make it kinda modular so we can choose which sections to use and which to leave vanilla? I remember Bummer's update of Ricardo's A-10c texture mod came with a couple alternwtive versions for somee parts of the cockpit.
  17. Hey mate, i have a question concerning your dynamic kneeboard system. As i have read in the description in the OP, these dynamic pages are being build from the mission file when loading the mission. Is it possible to rebuild new pages during the mission? The idea being; you contact an ai jtac and all his info is then imported to a sort of 9-line mission card on the kneeboard. I reckon all the ai jtac's info must be stored somewhere either in the mission file, or in some dcs cache or so, and might be readable. This info should be in the same format i reckon, and it might be possible to then import this line for line to a kneeboard 9-line mission card.
  18. I just downloaded the w_o V7 version and i too got the ww2 asset pack/technics error message. You sure you uploaded the correct mission files in the OP? This mission looks intriguing, maybe you forgot something from the WW2 asset pack when you removed the other mods?
  19. Hrm, the wheel whobbling issue makes it quite hard to takeoff, especially whith a heavy load. That front wheel should be completely stiff and not move at all correct?
  20. Still hope you would consider adding an english cockpit. The modded one is great but might break every now and then when ED changes things. So this would be one less thing to worry about.
  21. sc_neo

    F-15E UFC poll

    The red lettering of the old analog ufc looks a bit off to me. Thus to stay in line with the green pattern on the other mfds and how it looks green in the Harrier und F/A-18, i vote for the modern version.
  22. Hrm, this sounds like the F-14 project might rap up before the Viggen...which would be quite unfortunate to say the least!
  23. Very stoked about this! Really looking forwards to the new Cockpit. @Rudel Do say the new cockpit coming with phase 2 is/will be created from laser scans? And i'd like to encourgae you to really go all out on the texture quality inside the cockpit. For instance, i was on the fence between getting the Mig-19 or Mig-21. But the textures in the Mig-19 on the fuselage frames where the canopy rests when closed are pretty pixelated (which you only see with an open cockpit), so i opted to get the Mig-21 because there is a good chance the new cockpit will be of very high quality. It's attention to small details like this that make for a great module.
  24. Nope, Razbam confirmed some things were removed from the latest patch. Next update then i reckon.
  • Create New...