JediMaster

I liked both of them fine, but I thought they were overhyped a bit by some people. This seems to inevitably happen. I see a film and think it's ok, others think it's the best ever. I see another film I think isn't very good, and others say it's the worst abomination to grace the screen. I guess I just don't buy into the hyperbole.

In either case, you're watching grown men playing with balls.

The point is that TK has made life harder for the modders, but not for the players. Not only does SF2 merged now offer more than SF2 did on release, I'd say it works better. The flipside is mods are becoming harder and harder to update for patches, so you have two choices: one, make separate installs for mods and new stock content like DLCs...but if you want your low clouds and your latest DLC planes in one install you're SOL. Or two, just give it up. Now personally, I don't know that TK's efforts at curbing people ripping off his stuff has had any real effect. For every theoretical loss prevention he accomplished, I think he alienated more users dedicated to using mods to the point where they stopped buying his stuff. Gaining one new customer at the expense of 5 existing ones is not a good plan, but I think that's the unintended consequence of his actions. I would say I think some people here are overly wedded to certain mods, so that when a patch comes along that breaks or disables it from working they take it very personally. I've never been THAT into it, all I've ever done is add planes and other objects and terrains. If they work and look good, I keep them, if something breaks them, I try and .ini edit but if that fails I dump them. Being more laid back about it has meant I've never felt "betrayed" by TK. I HAVE felt disappointed that SF2:NA wasn't more than it was after the long delays, and that since then we've had just a bunch of DLCs, about 1/2 of which was actually really good and the rest was unnecessary. I was certain when NA came out that now, 18 months later, we'd have Exp 3 already and he'd have been talking about his next full title after NA. Whether a Korean War title or something else like possibly embracing farther into the 80s, I can't say, but something. I'm truly sorry TK has had all these financial difficulties with his stuff, especially as it seems he's right back where he started a decade ago...but I honestly think it's partly his fault. Programming and products aside, his business model/sense has at times seemed to sabotage him more than help him...and while you can argue the technical stuff with him and he'll listen if you have a valid point, there's no convincing him his business acumen isn't as good as it needs to be. One final note, that I won't bother posting over at TW's site because I feel it wouldn't matter anyway: it's time for SF to go on Steam. I don't care if you like Steam or not, it has exposure. Even if Valve takes half, his stuff is now getting pretty old and if he could pick up a bunch of new customers buying titles for $10 each that previously would never have seen his stuff, what does he have to lose? Many devs have posted their results of being on Steam especially during Steam sales revealing that at a 50% discount their sales would jump several HUNDRED percent. Wouldn't it be better to sell 100,000 copies of his SF2 titles at $10-15 each than 10,000 at $30? Even 50,000 would be a massive improvement, and how many Steam users have no idea TW exists? Just IMO.

One is for MP only, the other brings you to the main menu where there is also an MP option. It's been like that since Black Shark 1.

At low alt, if the Tomcat is below you, it would work. Other than that, not really. Anyway, you're looking at the reason all the USN 14's were chopped up.

No, they'll officially be Virginauts. I'm sure they'll wear the title with pride.

Underwater in the Bahamas of course.

Something I saw on the KS page I didn't see in the PR: OLEG MADDOX Did he actually agree to return to the WWII sim world with this? If he's going to have a major level of involvement, more than his token final CloD contributions, then I think they have a major shot at recapturing the glory. Deservedly or not, Luthier's rep was hurt by CloD. Oleg's was as well, mostly for letting people believe he worked on it longer than he really did so as not to hurt CloD's sales pre-release apparently. It looked a bit like blatant manipulation which was not well received (again, I'm not talking facts here, I'm talking appearance which in PR is often more important than facts). But if Oleg is taking an active role in this, even if he's not running the show, then 777 has a real contender on its hands instead of running for the "top next gen WWII sim" title unopposed. Again, it's possibly appearance trumping reality here, but this is a major point.

The engine wasn't designed to be as open as TK's was for SF. It's just how it is. I would LOVE to be able to take planes made for SF1/2 and port them into DCS, even if they're not flyable but just targets (because DCS needs more AI-only planes too), but that's not what DCS World allows. So for variety and various eras I'll be keeping SF2 and for current stuff I'll be flying DCS. By picking 1982 as his official end date TK really did position himself right before DCS/LOMAC. And by starting post-WWII he positioned himself after the Il-2s and what not that are out there (our modders' efforts to make WWII versions notwithstanding).

Where's the DCS one already?!? Grrrr.....

I'm thinking it might fill Jane's WWII Fighters shoes before EAW...seeing as EAW had the BoB and the entire Western Euro war from 43-45. The narrow focus does put it in more direct competition with BoS, which focuses on Stalingrad while Jane's WWIIF focused on the Battle of the Bulge.

Wow, I bet he never expected to live to 97 with a life like that!

It's possible EA imported the other email addresses from an older database. Did you use those with EA.com? Or maybe something with BF or MOH?

I think I want to know more about this part. It's "the last major release"? So, F/A-18C comes out first? They're moving on to a DCS World 2 after this? This is separate from DCS World somehow? That one paragraph just opened a HUGE can of beans that I imagine Matt will be wading through for some time to come until they release a clearer roadmap.

I've never really looked into it, but with all the mandatory appeals and jazz, I'm not sure that a life sentence costs more than a death sentence anymore. The money spent by the lawyers and judges and others to prove/disprove suitability for execution is much higher than just room and board in a cell. So unless the death sentence is expedited and the con is in their 20s and will live till their 70s, it's possible a life sentence is cheaper nowadays.

Amen to that. I would think the best time would be in high school. After all, if you enlist in the military, it will be the year after graduation. As such, I don't think people can make the BS "they're too young" argument...when would you like them to wait till? Besides, you don't need live ammo to teach gun safety. It could be taught in class with occasional field trips to firing ranges for practical experience and would get around the thorny "no guns on school grounds" issue.

I don't think the A model could sustain 7-8. It just didn't have the engines for that. Instantaneous, sure, but to sustain that many in a turn you need some power behind you.

I think you're misreading what they said. The D was the "definitive" initial variant, which means it was the first version to be produced and used in large numbers. Many of the previous ones went into production, but they were made in insignificant numbers.

Someone needs to start thinking outside the box, because the two simple stances of "no one should have any because of a bad few" (let's allow the crazies to ruin it for everyone) and "if everyone had one the bad few wouldn't try it" (when of course they still would because they're not criminals, they're crazy) will never meet. While I'm sure there are "purists" who would argue any such mod to an existing gun ruins its value to collectors blah blah blah, the upside is allowing the legal owner of the gun full access while denying the illegal ones is the goal. Since it's not the NRA members that are out robbing stores or shooting up schools, it's of course ridiculous to punish them. The problem is they haven't put forth any plan themselves that would improve things. If simple deterrence really worked...then why do people still shoot at cops? After all, everyone KNOWS they're armed! Same with the freak at the Army base. He was certainly under no delusions that there wouldn't be an armed response, but he did it anyway...yet even on a military base most soldiers don't walk around carrying an M-16 or even a sidearm. If trained soldiers don't do it, to think the general public should (with less or even no training) is certainly not wise. I would imagine an increase in injuries and possibly deaths from accidental discharges that would be nontrivial. I don't know if something like a DNA/palm lock is really workable right now, let alone how easily one could be defeated. I'm sure if someone stole it and took it back to a workshop there would be a way of removing it, but I would imagine it would eliminate a large number of problems from people who steal a gun and use it shortly thereafter. I think both sides need to start thinking along these lines.

Oh, wow, orbital arty? Significant increase in distance then! Also would look pretty cool, like the Autobots arriving in Earth in the first Transformers film.

Considering 90%+ of flight time is training/peacetime work, it makes sense. In war, max limits are allowed. There's no "better not break 6g trying to dodge this missile or there could be a lengthy post-flight inspection!" If you allow max limits for all flight time, the planes wear out faster. It's just math.

Radar performance is dictated by dish size. Fact. The A-4's nose is even smaller than the F-16's. Fact. An A-4's A2A radar performance can not be as good as an F-16 as a result. Fact. Yet putting an AN/APG-66 radar in an A-4 would cost just as much as one in an F-16. Fact. As I said, it could be done, yes. If you're a fan of the Scooter and like how it looks, there's no reason in a sim not to make it...because a sim doesn't make you think about the economics, just the aerodynamics. You could make a fighter that costs $500m and it would be fine, just don't expect to see it built. It's just not economically feasible. Not when there are used F-16s out there that would give better performance for the money. Or you can spend as much money (or maybe more) redesigning the nose and aft section (which is more than an extended tailpipe...that cooled the exhaust to make IR missiles have more difficulty tracking it, not to prevent the tail from melting in full stage 5 burner) and then all the associated flight testing to make sure you didn't ruin anything you liked about the Scooter in the first place. So I answered Stratos' question by saying "No" if you're talking about real life. The sim is irrelevant. The costs are just prohibitive given what would have to be done...otherwise, don't you think we WOULD have seen this done? The RNZAF would've upgraded it's planes instead of deciding to buy F-16s...the political decision to scrap it all notwithstanding. This has NOTHING to do with your mod vs some other what-if mods vs the price of pie in Togo. I'm just talking about the possibility of ever seeing an A-4 like the one you modded actually in service anywhere. Besides, if you use his "60s" stipulation, you can't use the F404, you can't use the AN/APG-66, you have to use what was around at the time...and neither of those were, so it's even more "no." Most people don't ask if a given mod is something we'll ever see, they just go with it because it's cool. So I don't bother to point out why mod X would not happen because, well, it's just a mod. But, hey, if you want to take my declaration that it would never happen (which history has supported) as some sort of indictment of your mod, well, go ahead, I can't stop you. Feel free to misinterpret every thing I say for that matter. Doesn't really make a difference. Just know that if anyone would mod say an F-86 to have an F110 engine and a nose with an AESA AN/APG-79 radar that just dominates the skies, and someone asks if we could ever see something like that in reality, I will also say "no."

Reminds me of the modded EECH. Hopefully we'll get one for DCS not too far in the future.

Well, the weekly experiment didn't last long. I understand that perhaps things didn't move fast enough to warrant that, but I also think monthly seems too long...unless the pace of development is such that really it takes a month before anything significant happens, in which case more's the pity. Maybe twice monthly would've been a better idea. I will point out a scenario where monthly won't work that well...if for example the monthly newsletter comes out less than a week before a patch like 1.2.6, and then we have to wait almost a full month to hear any news on possible small patches for any issues that exist.

When you're only concerned with the plane and not the environment it's in you should have smaller development times. That said, the Mig-21 seems to have suffered some feature creep resulting in the redoing of a large part of the work. My guess is we could've had it long ago at a lower level of quality, so I only hope this wait is worth it.