Jump to content

seedofcheif

Members
  • Content Count

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About seedofcheif

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  1. for me it would be * allow the editor to create no-fly-zones where opfor doesnt agro unless you enter their airspace * make the day/night cycle visible in the editor * add something similar to the seek and destroy option in arma where the AI will loiter in an area and look for targets (esp important for ground units) this is more for general gameplay, but it would make mission making a lot more fun * add an independant faction * civilian air traffic * expand civilian sea traffic * penalties for killing civilians * make carriers/airstrips act like actual bases with people in them
  2. I know you this is a little off topic but nineline, I want you to really quick read your posts over the last few hours then go to pretty much any other online PR account, McDonald's, Best buy, EA, take your pick. Read how they respond to customer criticism. Do you notice how they take that critisism and engage with those customers? Even if what the customer say is blatantly wrong they remain civil and understanding in communications. How do you think you compare? Part of the reason why people are getting so angry is because of how you've responded to criticisim. Instead of acknowledging the
  3. Nothing about those modules makes me unhappy, it's the concept that because we have these modules in development that we aren't allowed to be upset for any reason. Do you see anyone in approval of this? I don't. It's clear that the overwhelming majority of people who are making their voice heard dislike this choice.
  4. You're pissing off you're existing customers in favor of potentially pleasing new ones. Not only does this directly contradict one of the basic rules of buissnes (existing customers are always king) but more importantly you don't need to do this you can please both parties this just seems so self destructive...
  5. Then why not add new airframes? Those who bought an FC4 airframe are probably less likely to want to buy the exact same thing just with more detail. why not kill two birds with one stone by adding new airframes to please current pilots who want a bigger roster and also attract more new customers?
  6. This just seems silly, why not expand the airframes available instead of underming their own sales by having 2 versions of the exact same aircraft?
  7. Strange because I didn't have an issue with 2.5.0 and the caucuses map which is obviously more resource intensive runs fine if a bit more laggy than before. I'll get back to you when things get situated and I can test it out
  8. sure thing partner ASUS Desktop M51AC series Intel core i7-4770 CPU 3.40GHz 3.40GHz 16GB RAM geforce GT640 dcs.log-20180509-175917.zip
  9. i just updated to 2.5.1 and whenever i fly in NTTR the game crashes. it seems to run fine on the caucuses however NTTR will crash either during load up or a few seconds after mission start. i tried repairing DCS with no effect on target. any ideas whats going on?
  10. Is there any intention to improve ECM and EW for the sake of making a representative MALD?
  11. The said the exclusion of it was a typo, not it's inclusion.
  12. So what I'm hearing is that you guys haven't committed to a block yet and are still in the info gathering stage? I just ask to get a feel for where you are in development. Either way I can't wait to take this bird out with the Thunderbirds livery :pilotfly:
  13. Any idea which block we're getting?
  14. does anyone know what variant(s) of the JSOW we're getting? if its an A variant than its essentially a glide CBU-103 while the C variant is a bunker buster with terminal guidance.
×
×
  • Create New...