Any concern over Harrier development?

Anyone still flying this bird? I haven’t touched it for a good 2 months now just because the lack of progression and the bugs still present.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Anyone still flying this bird? I haven’t touched it for a good 2 months now just because the lack of progression and the bugs still present.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I fly it every now and again. Once some of the long standing bugs get crushed I would probably use it a bit more or perhaps get into some serious mission building with it. It sure is a treat to zip around in compared to the A-10C:D

I fly it a lot. I reckon EW page and JDAMs would have people coming back to look. Until the Hornet gets some optical aids/lasing it's very much my go-to air to ground.

I fly it a lot. The DMT is as cool as the FLIR. Delivering Mk82s with the DMT makes a lot of fun, even at night. Tpod is more or less only frustrating.

Also it is a lot faster then the A10c and vertical landing in the Tarawa is a blast.

Unfortunately, it is bugged all over and most times it is very frustrating to use.

I really hope that Razbugs, sorry, Razbam gets their a** up and fix all those bugs and funalize this awesome bird. Its alreary a pretty long way...

I fly it a lot. The DMT is as cool as the FLIR. Delivering Mk82s with the DMT makes a lot of fun, even at night. Tpod is more or less only frustrating.

Also it is a lot faster then the A10c and vertical landing in the Tarawa is a blast.

 

Unfortunately, it is bugged all over and most times it is very frustrating to use.

I really hope that Razbugs, sorry, Razbam gets their a** up and fix all those bugs and funalize this awesome bird. Its alreary a pretty long way...

I think that’s why I hardly fly it. They have fixed some select bugs, but the rate is very slow. So slow it’s almost concerning. I hope these modules are not just cash grabs like I’ve witnessed some other developers for different simulations. They really started off well and now..... I really don’t want to sound or be demanding. I want RAZBAM to succeed and succeed very well. However, it’s getting very quiet.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

At least they do it for free. As I was afraid earlier in this thread I'm allowed to pay a third time for the KA-50. And hey the remaining bugs will also get fixed after six or seven years. A mark Razbam never reached (and hopefully wont).

At least they do it for free.

LOL?!

Don't know about the Ka-50, but for me, the Harrier is nearly Scam and playing a trick on customers.

I would rather kiss a running chainsaw then saying "thank you Razbam for (not) fixing those bugs on a never completed, but in afvanced full paid module".

Guys, have you won your money in lottery? Could you act on your workplace like that? If I would work like they, I would have been fired multiple times... And then you think we should be thankful?

Once again: LOL?!

You can't be serious...

Or have you not realized that you have not even received 70% from the product you paid 100%? And that they made another module in the meantime as whip on the top?

At least they do it for free. As I was afraid earlier in this thread I'm allowed to pay a third time for the KA-50.

They don't, they sell it for 70$. Early access, remember?

That's way more than I paid for two copies of BS (RU and ENG) and BS2 over the span of several years. And those were feature complete products at the time they hit the shelves.

And those were feature complete products at the time they hit the shelves.

How could they have been feature complete if features that should have been there to begin with are being added at an additional cost? Am I somehow confused?

Al the features written on the box/store page were there on day 1. No beta/early access, that's feature complete.

Whether that aligns with your personal list of features that a module "should" have, 10 years later, is another story.

Don't know about the Ka-50

You said everything...

Or have you not realized that you have not even received 70% from the product you paid 100%

Not sure, I thought your problem was the lack of bug fixing. I have to admit last time I played I don't realized that one third of the module is missing. If this is true It would be in line with nearly all other EA modules apart from the F-14. It's "only" a year now but I suggest you take a look into the Hornet feature list and make an educated guess how much years to go. I saw the first AG radar screens 4 years ago...

Simply wait 3 years and buy the modules after they leave EA. Its the future and not only from Razbams side but thats a point most of you don't see or won't see.

They don't, they sell it for 70$. Early access, remember?

 

That's way more than I paid for two copies of BS (RU and ENG) and BS2 over the span of several years. And those were feature complete products at the time they hit the shelves.

Lucky one, as day one customer I paid more than for the Harrier to this point increasing after ED sells the new update. I don't talk about features but bugs. Feature complete is a pending definition. Next time we will get a feature complete prototype jet and pay for the combat tested version as DLC. I'm looking foward to the A10 update... welcome to the future of module distribution :thumbup:

If you count in non working or, bugged up and missing features, yes, then we are even far away from 70%.

You would like to compare the Hornet with the Harrier? Good idea, start with the change logs from the last year. Tell me what you found out.

I'll make it short for you:

While on the Harrier happenend nearly nothing, and important bugs are there for months, and they worked on and released another aircraft, the Hornet received nearly every month new festures and bugs have been fixed within the next update.

I don't know why everyone is always bitching about EA? EA is a good idea, only the abuse that Razbam is doing with it, is a problem. The real problem are people who say "thank you" to that way Razbam acts. This is hurting the whole DCS enviroment over a long term...

If there is an old module like the A10c (which I'm flying also and have not recognized any bugs so far) and it gets an overhaul for graphics, or an modification to another version with other features, I'm fine with that to pay for it.

It was a finished product. Bug free.

Razbam did not even delivered one finished, bug free module. But took the money.

@ripper: You really think it is possible to continue developing features for a several years old module for free?

Where shall the money come from?

It is ED we are talking about, not blizzard or electronic arts.

Go and take a look at other simulators which are much more expensive than dcs.

Gesendet von meinem VOG-L29 mit Tapatalk

Al the features written on the box/store page were there on day 1. No beta/early access, that's feature complete.

 

Whether that aligns with your personal list of features that a module "should" have, 10 years later, is another story.

Thank you for pointing that out!

Now, looking at the store page of the Harrier:

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/av8bna/

we can see that everything - except the JDAM type of weapons - is already implemented and just needs some refinement.

Thus one could say that "concern over Harrier development" is really not called for at all.

Of course, whether implementation of said features aligns with your personal view of what a module "should" have is another story.

If you count in non working or, bugged up and missing features, yes, then we are even far away from 70%.

Not fair from your side, you said missing not bugged…

You would like to compare the Hornet with the Harrier? Good idea, start with the change logs from the last year. Tell me what you found out.

I found that the first Harrier year also looked more impressive. Tell me what you found on the Hornet the last 4 weeks? Progress is slowing when more complicated stuff is being worked on. And before you start with TGP, everybody is waiting for the new FLIR implementation. Otherwise we would have a lasing Hornet.

If there is an old module like the A10c (which I'm flying also and have not recognized any bugs so far)...

I strongly recommend a look into the A-10C bug forum. It's still in use.

@ripper: You really think it is possible to continue developing features for a several years old module for free?

Where shall the money come from?

It is ED we are talking about, not blizzard or electronic arts.

No, I'm not thinking everything is for free, but celebrating a cockpit upgrade with bug fixes (some of them years old) while not even acknowledging other developers updated to PBR cockpits earlier sounds a bit biased in my opinion.

Thank you for pointing that out!

 

Now, looking at the store page of the Harrier:

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/av8bna/

 

we can see that everything - except the JDAM type of weapons - is already implemented and just needs some refinement.

Thus one could say that "concern over Harrier development" is really not called for at all.

 

Of course, whether implementation of said features aligns with your personal view of what a module "should" have is another story.

This! :thumbup:

When there is everything implemented and festure complete, then show me how you can slew anything with an axis? How you can slave the tpod to the dmt or a wp? How you can align the flir on the hud? How you can use all the pages on the mfd's? How you can pop chaffs in s mode? How the lock indicazor on the agm122 is not way off?

Are you flying the Harrier constantly? It seems like you are not knowing what you are talking about.

And it also seems, that you don't mind getting wuat youve paid for...

When there is everything implemented and festure complete, then show me how you can slew anything with an axis? How you can slave the tpod to the dmt or a wp? How you can align the flir on the hud? How you can use all the pages on the mfd's? How you can pop chaffs in s mode? How the lock indicazor on the agm122 is not way off?

Nothing of that is game breaking and only minor tuning work. Yes they added the damage model instead of smahing bugs. Seems they have another priority lists than the players but at least it is their Business.

Are you flying the Harrier constantly? It seems like you are not knowing what you are talking about.

Yes, regularly but getting personal when arguments are running out seems to be a popular habit these days. That's the time were a discussion is no longer constructive and I'm out. Great Job!

I need to ask if you are flying it, because that "its all fine, no game breaking bugs here" feels like you are not useing it.

Otherwise you would know about that endless list of bugs and missing things.

People have paid the full price for a not completed and bugged module. They are doing nearly to nothing on it. But they worked and released a completely different module. Also they are constantly not telling the truth.

So do you think that this behavor is good and ok?

Thank you for pointing that out!

 

Now, looking at the store page of the Harrier:

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/av8bna/

 

we can see that everything - except the JDAM type of weapons - is already implemented and just needs some refinement.

"Some refinement", yeah.

Documentation is not done.

Training is not complete.

The listed systems do not work as specified in the documentation, whether it's original Razbam docs or, in lack of it, the real ones.

And you're still comparing a module that's ~20 months after it's initial release to a module that was feature complete on day 1, which was not the point of my post which you've quoted.

Sure, if you like the state of the Harrier as it is now, go play it, just don't try to tell me Razbam spent the last 20 months doing something for free, because they did not. They just took your money in advance, and they still did not fulfil their end of bargain.

 

People have paid the full price for a not completed and bugged module.

This is the definition of EA and every customer agreed to this state of the module by transfering money.

They are doing nearly to nothing on it.

Cockpit textures updated

MPCD Knobs Fixed

MPCD Brightness Control Updated

MPCD BIT Page enabled

LCD Display Updated

Damage Model is now enabled (WiP):

INS System

RWR Receiver

Weapons Stations

Chaff + Flares

SMS Damage enabled

DMT Damage enabled

FLIR Damage enabled

CMDS Damage enabled

CONF Page enabled

Training Missions updated

HUD Update: Steer-To point symbol available on NAV and VTOL modes.

HUD reacts to device damage:

- INS

- Mission Computer (MSC)

- Weapons Manager (SMS)

- Armament Control Panel (ACP)

- Aircraft Computer (ADC)

Roll Stabilized Sight (iron sight) enabled (WiP)

MPCD STRS (Stores) page reacts to device damage (WiP)

Weapons Manager (SMS) damage model update (WiP)

The latest stable changelog proves you wrong. Because they don't fixed features you like is purely subjective.

But they worked and released a completely different module.

Every developer does this. ED with the Mi-24 and the F-16 while the Hornet is EA, Heatblur did it with the F-14 while the Viggen was unfinished and EA, Magnitude with the Eagle while the Mig-21 was (and is) still not bug free.

Also they are constantly not telling the truth.

As Wags always say: "Everything is subject to Change." All modules lost some features during development (UH-1 multicrew :music_whistling:). Axis slew is not a missing feature of a module btw.

Documentation is not done.

As like for all other EA products

Training is not complete.

The Harrier has perhaps the most training missions available for any module, even if not complete yet.

Black Shark was never an EA product so it had to be feature complete.

So do you think that this behavor is good and ok?

I never said this nor is this my personal opinion. I know that dancing around the fire like Rumpelstiltskin won't do any good and try to avoid this at any time.

. They just took your money in advance, and they still did not fulfil their end of bargain.

Which "bargain" was this? It was my understanding that we all willingly bought in to a beta early-release. I don't recall there being any timescale given for RAZBAM to complete (insert favourite part of aircraft here) either.

(@FSKRipper Spot on, mate!)

So, the'll probably finish the Harrier in five years, lot of things will still be bugged and missing and you are applauding that.

I'm sure that this is fine and also very good for DCS ;).

LSS for the TPOD is on it's way soon. Hopefully will revist the SLAVE (as it's so close and asked for a lot)

I'm kindda concerned over TAMMAC and the EW page and what the intention is with it. We should have it on the third Left SS press, it's completely not in the game.

The bomb fall line being un-messed up took WAY TOO LONG. That was a horrible bug to leave in the product for that length of time, really months and months. But now it's fixed, feels more like back on a development path.

LOFT mode and depressed CCIP really need to be in there. The model the Hornet development goes for is finishing one very basic mode, then moving on. It might be expected to have had the bomb interval timers and all the delivery modes working from the beginning but the development process seemed to skim to basic functionalities and I think that knocked peoples confidence.

Harrier is not lost right now but I believe this fuss was needed to steer the pressure back to concentrate on in development modules and not go chasing fast chains of EA partial and slow deliveries.

It's still great as is, but suffers from some TPOD issues on features, some main features like EW page and general completion on smaller things like the heat source mapping to HUD (as well as a good look at the TPOD handling, slewing and page behaviours) which really leave me feeling as if it's never intended to have been finished. If the Developers hadn't gone silent on it, i'm sure there would be less fuss on the forums, but if you don't answer questions, people will use their own conclusions and that is not how to handle communication. I still can't see any lessons learned coming out. Seems to be reverting to less communication, which isn't better. Yet the small bits come out of what they did do, just no "intention" delivered of what they intend to do.

Whatever happened to DECOY anyways? I've not seen him around for a while and he used to be really active

I saw him post in a thread about the latest OB update delay to 2.5.5. I believe in the DCS World topic. It was very short. Makes me wonder.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro