Leatherneck Simulations New Years Eve Update

Worth a read....

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2624973&postcount=1

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dear All,

It's been a very eventful year for Leatherneck Simulations-- even though, despite our best efforts, we did not manage to launch any new products this year.
Not only has it been eventful year, it has undoubtedly been probably one of the most challenging times that we've experienced as a developer.

Not only have we been developing three DCS modules with associated theaters and period units concurrently; but we've also significantly expanded, developed new technology
and tools, restructured our teams and even begun preparatory planning for products beyond the 'sequel trilogy'.

Perhaps the biggest change for us has been in transitioning from a small, tight-knit and concise 4-man unit, into a 'real' business-- one that currently comprises of 9 full time individuals and many more on temporary or outsourced basis.
This kind of growth would not have been possible without the success of the MiG-21; and for that you all have our sincere gratitude.

We'd also like to apologize for not adhering to our previous statements in that we expect a new LN module to appear this year.
Unfortunately, delays in developing some of our critical new technologies as well as a larger than expected workload with the MiG-21 precluded this from being achievable.
Likewise, these delays have led us to postpone our planned product reveals.

Website News Section
A long overdue update to our website in the form of a new News section is now available.
If you find it difficult or time consuming to follow the forums or hunt down updates from us; we'll be cross posting anything relevant to this page.
This includes smaller announcements such as notices and warnings.

We've been fairly quiet over the course of 2015; with a mere half a dozen major updates scattered across the year, but this is of course has only been a temporary period that is soon coming to a close.
Thus, heavy use and far denser updates on this page are to be expected.

www.leatherneck-sim.com/news

EDIT: Will go live on the 1st. I broke it.


New Public Bugtracker

As you may have noticed by the stickied posts; in order to better
accommodate both current and future project update needs; we have decided to open a public bugtracker.

This will allow us to more effectively receive bugreports from you, convey what is received and already fixed, as well as offer an insight into our post release support process.
We also hope that the added transparency will better indicate how many changes are made that previously were not noted in changelogs.

https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.com/

We'd like to urge all of you to cease reporting bugs on the Bugs sub forums (unless significant discussion is indicated) and instead help us out
by registering a new account and reporting a bug on the bugtracker.



New Team Members

One of the most important developments within LN this year has been the continued expansion of the team with some of the most talented individuals we can possibly find.
We pride ourselves on being a team built upon steadfast pillars of professionalism and excellence in our chosen profession; be it in the field of programming or art.

Thus, it's with great joy and pride that we welcome Stirling Rank and Daniel Malmquist to the Leatherneck team. You're already familiar with parts of Stirling's work; in the form of the F-14 Pilot we presented earlier this year.
We've actually already introduced Stirling in the previous mini-update, but it was fairly unceremonious.
Daniel has also been with us for a while now; as he takes charge on the creation of the F-14's flight and physical models.




Hailing from Ystad, in the south of Sweden, Daniel now lives in Stockholm.
Complementing his huge interests in engineering and aviation is a Ph.D. in the fields of modeling and optimization of electromechanical systems, from the Royal Institute of Technology, arguably the leading engineering university in Sweden.

Daniels' keen interest in aviation has expressed itself in many ways; including being a licensed private pilot and the designing and developing several small unmanned
drones during his extensive research experience. Daniel’s strong theoretical background, combined with his programming experience makes him an excellent addition to the LNS team, and for spearheading the creation of the F-14 Flight and physical models.

Besides, look at those dreamy eyes and perfect complexion. How could we have said no?

[INDENT]

Hailing from Melbourne, Australia-- Stirling has skillfully avoided Scorpions, Exploding Cacti, Sharks, Crocodiles, Snakes, Arachnids, Jellyfish and other Australians to go on and become a brilliant young character and hard surface artist.

Despite his relatively young age, Stirling has built an impressive portfolio of hard and soft surface modeling, deeply rooted in strong sculpting talents.
While Character modeling may not be the first thing you think of when compiling your flight simulation wishlist; we couldn't be happier with the human element that Stirling brings to the table.

I think we've all seen the impressive results that well crafted, animated and engaging characters can do for immersion in titles such as Star Citizen.
We look forward to applying Stirlings' artwork in new and innovative ways, especially with the widespread adoption of VR just around the corner!

MiG-21bis

Changes between 1.2.16 and 1.5/2.0

The MiG-21 saw many overt and covert changes in the 1.5 and 2.0 updates.
Some of these changes, coupled with the large changes in the DCS engine have resulted in a high number of new bugs and issues.
We're working very hard to fix all of these, and you can see most of them in the public bugtracker linked above.

We've also been very sloppy with maintaining a public change log.
Most of the items changed or fixed are listed below, but I'd estimate that there are at least a dozen or two more items not listed.
Here is a more comprehensive list, including the previously listed changes. Keep an eye on the bugtracker in the future for a better understanding on open or resolved issues.[INDENT]

[*]Replaced multiple existing inputs with toggle inputs.
[*]Re-Added several requested replaced inputs.
[*]Added 9 New Keyboard Inputs: ASP Target Size, KPP Pitch Set, RSBN/PRGM Channel Select, Radio On/Off, Radio Volume & Channel Selection
[*]Fixed various instances of the Radio not working.
[*]Fixed the Radar operating without electrical power
[*]Increased missile smoke visibility
[*]Fixed the “SPRD Appears on F6 View after use” bug
[*]Introduced special option for ASP pipper gameplay features.
[*]Improved drag chute physics, including chute use in stall/spin recovery (Animation is however still limited)
[*]Corrected Rudder Authority (“Rudder overpowering ailerons”)
[*]Added UUA Sensor animation
[*]Improved Over-G weapon jettison (Dynamic Weight Calculation, per-pylon/weapon limit)
[*]Improved regulated Afterburner throttle control
[*]Partially fixed visible weapons remaining on destroyed/missing wings
[*]Fixed A-A missile lock tone bug
[*]Corrected wing thickness & angle
[*]Various corrections on all weapon pylons
[*]Rebuilt frontal canopy for smooth fuselage transition
[*]Re-Drew rivet and panel lines on rear fuselage
[*]Dozens of minor 3D/2D issues
[*]Fixed various Cockpit graphics issues
[*]Corrected various ASP calculation issues (Incorrect lead, “CCIP”)
[*]Added 8-10 new default liveries
[*]New specular maps
[*]Sculpted rear fuselage into a new normal map
[*]Added new SPRD Rocket booster model and texture
[*]Corrected placement of SPRD Rocket booster on aircraft
[*]Further optimized external model and textures
[*]Revised gear door textures
[*]Corrected AoA vane animation
[*]Temporarily removed 'Canopy Icing' checkbox pending visual implementation
[*]LOD models optimized.
[*]Incorrect ASO texture replaced.
[*]Radome axis of movement fixed.
[*]Double cockpit in low graphic settings fixed.
[*]Tactical number slot holes fixed.
[*]Added more variations of Russian tactical numbers.
[*]Added Arabic tactical numbers.
[*]Changed material setting from mirror to aluminum.
[*]Landing gear’s external lights now come on only at full extension.
[*]Remodeled external pilot’s visor and is now transparent with specular.
[*]Navigation lights during the day are now bigger in “Bright” mode.
[*]Missing panel lines and sealant on external canopy/windscreen added.
[*]Missing rivets on right-side drag chute tube added.
[*]Missing screws on top-side wing fuel tank panels added.
[*]UVs for middle fuselage flipped 180 degrees to fix NMp errors.
[*]Liveries adjusted for UV flip.
[*]New normal and specular textures.
[*]Fixed Radar crashing in 2.0
[*]Corrected broken Normalmaps due to UV Flip
[*]Corrected broken Specular maps due to UV Flip
[*]Added support for NTTR map in RSBN Navigation System
[*]Added additional Kneeboard panels
[*]Fixed Kneeboard not showing map
[*]Increased tracer visibility
[*]Changed UPK pod CLSID to avoid CLSID conflict
[*]Fixed crashing when selecting RSBN Channel above 18
[*]Joystick double throttle input bug fixed
[*]Changed MiG-21Bis → MiG-21bis
[*]Fixed Training missions appearing in list
[*]Updated StarForce protection system to avoid future issues
[*]Fixed Aircraft shaking erroneously after broken tires
[*]Fixed wheelbrake axis causing unstoppable air leak
[*]Fixed booster aileron inconsistencies.


MiG-21bis Backer Rewards

As mentioned in the previous update; we've now made this issue a priority, especially considering how long it's now been since release. After considering several options; we'd like to propose the following changes to the backer tiers. While we are incredibly grateful for the support shown to the MiG-21bis project in its' infancy; we're unfortunately producing these items at a complete loss.

We're hoping to produce the following items:


[*]MiG-21bis DVD: Jewel case with MiG-21bis installation disc & assorted development Screenshots, high resolution artwork and more.
Your backer key will be printed on the back.
[*]Printed Hardcover Manual: Printed, hardcover A5 manual, black and white print of the flight manual.
[*]MiG-21 T-shirt: Stylish, low-key MiG-21bis shirt.


We'd thus propose the following changes in the backer tier rewards.
Please feel free to share your input on these changes and whether you would feel comfortable with the new replacements.

Big
Previous Rewards: MiG-21bis DVD
New Reward: MiG-21bis DVD

High Value
Previous Rewards: MiG-21bis DVD + Bonus DVD
New Rewards:Printed physical manual

Bonus
Previous Rewards: MiG-21bis DVD + Bonus DVD + Shirt
New Rewards: MiG-21bis DVD + Printed physical manual

Extra
Previous Rewards: MiG-21bis DVD + Bonus DVD + T-Shirt, Stickers, Poster and autographed manual.
New Rewards: MiG-21bis DVD + Printed Physical Manual + T-Shirt

Special
Previous Rewards: 2x MiG-21bis DVD + Bonus DVD + 2x T-shirt, Stickers, 2x Posters and autographed manual.
New Rewards:2x MiG-21bis DVD + Printed Physical Manual + 2x T-Shirts + 1x Free Leatherneck product.


We're presently waiting on samples of the listed production items.
Once we have are satisfied with the items, we will order a proper production run and begin sending you your items.
Sincere apologies for the delay on this front.

Delicious Leeks – AJS-37 & F4U-1D

Whoops!

No, it's not a red herring. (We're bigger fans of cod and salmon, actually).
Obviously we screwed up a little here, but hopefully you'll forgive us.
We might as well talk briefly about these two, while we're at it.

As mentioned previously; difficulties in some of the new technology: in particular components required for an accurate simulation of these modules, unexpectedly high MiG-21 workload, as well as various illnesses have both delayed the aircraft themselves, as well as their respective announcements.

Both of these aircraft have afforded us an opportunity to develop critical technology for the future, and also serve as a stepping stone to a larger theater of war (F4U-1D).
Likewise, they have provided an easier path to unlock other aircraft making use of similar technology (AJS-37). It's also very important to remember that you may only catch a glimpse of the big picture with just the module names.
We have spent considerable time and resources into making sure that the products we create have an appropriate environment, opponents and other content.

In particular, some of the advancements we have made with these two modules are as follows:


[*]Various FM improvements and extensions, including e.g. thrust reversers, carrier trap simulation.
[*]Ground Mapping and Targeting Radar
[*]Terrain Avoidance Radar
[*]Advanced RWR including recording and recon features
[*]Advanced ASSM sea-skimming missiles (RB-15F & RB-04)
[*]Moderately advanced HUD
[*]Moderately advanced aircraft computer and navigation systems
[*]Displaced VID Display
[*]New Memory-Screen Radar Shader(s)
[*]...and quite a lot more


With an average development time of several years; every module we have built or will build will be very special to us.
Thus we want to make sure that your first look, but more importantly- your first impression of our work is exactly as good as you expect of us.

The simple but honest truth is: they're just not quite there yet. At least visually.
If a cockpit is 95% done and but there is a big white blob instead of a HUD– we'd rather ensure that we get that done before disappointing you.
It will be a few more weeks until we are ready.

Having learned from the mistakes we made with the MiG-21; we are committed to ensuring only the smoothest of launches. This means a feature complete aircraft, all included content (missions, campaigns, documentation) and as much internal QA as we can possibly squeeze in.
We'd prefer to avoid extended and prolonged BETA periods, especially with our planned 2016 & 2017 roadmap; thus it is imperative that we can minimize the intense post-release update period.


F-14 A & B Tomcat Update

Systems & FM

The Tomcat has seen considerable progress in the last few months; and even though we are behind our initial projected schedule (H2 2015) – we have very little regret as to how this flagship module is progressing.
The majority of the year has been spent recreating the entire framework and systems base of the aircraft.

Items such as Hydraulic, electrical, fuel and control systems are complex components of the aircraft and these items being complete, functional and relatively bug-free is a prerequisite before moving on to some of the more overt features and components.
We've also spent considerable time implementing various supporting functionality, such as for instance numerical solvers (e.g. 4th order Range-Kutta) for second and higher order dynamics which can be used for components like e.g. actuators.

We have now also begun making progress on the VSI, HSDI and HUD components, which are some of the most visual features of the systems modeling.
These systems directly tie into most of the other Aircraft systems, so they will not be fully complete until the very end of development.



The Flight Model has seen the most rapid progress over the last couple of months; and we've now begun assembling the physical model.
Primary focus is currently on Primary Handling of the aircraft: in essence, we are now working to perfect the overall body and wing aerodynamics, wing sweep dynamics & logic, and primary/secondary control surfaces and their influence.

Wing sweep logic, a core component of the F-14, is also complete and implements the four modes (Auto, Manual, Bomb, and Emergency) - making use of multiple underlying sweep schedules for both primary and secondary control channels.
The current implementation will of course allow us to calculate the effects of asymmetric wing sweep due to damage/malfunction.

In association with that, we have now also begun separating the visual animations into their respective hydraulic systems.
We are looking for a high level of granularity in failure simulation; and wherever there is a possibility of separate failure (e.g. separate hydraulic systems) – this will be simulated on our rendition of the Aircraft.
Electrical fuses, something frequently mentioned by the community, will be simulated to their fullest extent.




The aerodynamic speed brakes are a fairly good example of our targeted fidelity.
Each of the three control surfaces are individually modeled, allowing us to take into account asymmetric effects from damaged/malfunctioning actuators and surfaces.

Just the speed brakes alone use 11 (that's a lot!) different lookup tables to determine aerodynamic coefficients in the current implementation.
This will give yield very realistic and dynamic feel.

Overall, we feel very confident in our implementation of the F-14 flight model at this stage. We will not stop short of anything but perfection.[/INDENT]

Art

The majority of the art teams' focus still lies with projects other than the F-14.
The reason for this is that the aircraft is (still) at a level where the artwork does not in any way impair the development of systems or functionality.
This is an important distinction to make; because it allows for the art team to focus on areas where they are most needed.

That said; we've invested a significant amount of time in the last few months into unwrapping the Cockpit. This sounds boring and terribly unsexy – and that's because it is. Thousands of objects had to be individually unwrapped and correctly placed; eventually comprising 37 cockpit textures split across the two cockpits.
An artists' personal hell. We're glad it's over!



The next step is to begin sculpting various cockpit parts.
Bulging and peeling paint, metal imperfections, dings, scratches, fresh and old paint blotches, cloth parts, bent glareshields, and much more need to be accurately recreated to fully immerse the player.
Once we unveil the AJS-37 Cockpit; you will have a good indication of the quality level that we aim to achieve with all of our cockpits.

Not much has been done on the exterior in the last few months, apart from some significant accuracy improvements.
Referencing various new drawings caused us to adjust, in particular, the vertical tail planes and the entire front fuselage and canopy areas.
These were both very inaccurate, and required a lot of adjustments. It's an iterative process; so we expect there to be more changes as we go along.

We're quite optimistic about an F-14 materializing somewhere in the second half of 2016 – however this is, as usual, subject to change.
We'll keep you updated, and in particular start producing more material once the more overt visual features become more prominent!



Theatre Development

During most of 2015; we've focused on the creation of primary map content
for our planned theatres. This includes not only things like actual map objects (hangars, trenches, bunkers, destroyed aircraft, buildings, vegetation, and much more) but
also various vector assets such as roads, coastlines, elevation models, bodies of water and similar items.

Learning the production pipeline for the creation of maps for DCS has taken us close to the entire year; but we are now confident in our ability to create any terrain we set our mind to for the platform.
Perhaps most exciting, is that we've already carried out several in-game tests of already produced sections of land. It's a small, but very exciting step forwards!

In the beginning of 2016; we will be investing additional resources into the expansion of our theatre construction team. This will be in the form of more permanent employees at our offices in Swinoujscie.
We feel that only a large investment package will be enough to maintain our project goals, especially for products slated in 2017 and beyond.

Goodbye 2015!

We'd like to take some time to wish you all a Happy New Year!

As always, you have our sincere gratitude for your patience and support – can't
wait to finally repay you all by delivering what we've been promising.

See you in 2016!


Sincerely,
Leatherneck Simulations Team


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nate

There is a lot of info. Unfortunately as usual there is also A LOT missing. i.e. Where exactly is the flood of screenshots, videos and previews we were supposed to get in Aug/Sep. As a backer, it is with great dismay they we still haven't seen these rewards yet and now they are 'changing' them as well. They said last update in Sep that this was a priority but that was 4 months ago and still no real progress on that front.

With regards to the Viggen and Corsair, they can't exactly say anymore that this is so that we won't be disappointed and surprised, after all we have known about this for quite some time now and frankly I never got the whole "we don't want to disappoint you with some sparse screenshots/videos" instead they choose to give us NONE instead of just a few. At this stage of the game they have promised much and delivered essentially nothing, well, actually nothing.

At this point in time they are claiming they are going to deliver 3 modules this year, two 'modern' aircraft and all this while fixing the major issues with the Mig21 and making the required deviations when ED changes the engine over the next year to fix bugs or add features.

What is most bizarre is that they can release screenshots ingame an in 3ds of an aircraft that is approx 1 year away, yet can't produce some screenshots/videos of 2 aircraft that are supposed to be much closer.


Also here is a correct to his post

HE said

"We'd also like to apologize for not adhering to our previous statements in that we expect a new LN module to appear this year. "

What you actually said was that you were going to release two modules this year.


Sorry but I just don't buy it.

Hey Mustang, why don't you take a course in Object Oriented Design at a local college and go help them instead of badgering everyone who doesn't make their milestone.

I've been programming for a long time, it's easy - you'll see..

On one hand I think it's a good idea to bypass the beta even if the dates slip. I don't get to hung up on dates personally. On the other other hand, this must be some announcement, not even a single in game picture. from what I've seen this type of marketing (waiting until it out of beta to officially announce) is something completely different from what we are used to with DCS. hopefully it works out for all.

Printed Manual and T-shirt??? Where is their accountant!?! You can make money with these, you Leathernecks! I'm excited. Cant wait to see the Viggen.

You are making a big assumption there skippy. I already know how to program in C++, C#, ASM, and have also programmed on Vax, MicroVax and DecAlpha machines, but please tell me again how I need to take a programming course to help them get out the flood of screenshots and videos and previews they claimed we were going to get 5 months ago.

So, you'll be contributing then? I'd be very grateful if you did as Tomcat, Viggen, and Corsair are all three aircraft I need in my life and I doubt Saab will be funding a Viggen flight demo in the states that I can fly for.

Already sent my resume to Cobra.

Mustang is right, they screwed up on delivering 2 planes (and went silent knowing they will screw up in mid 2015 already). And there is no way in a frozen hell they will deliver an F-14 in 2016, June 2017 the earliest. And it is their and EDs fault for missing their deadlines by 6-12 months consistently. So the fanboys can stop telling people "to do it better" or "learn to program to feel for the poor developers". Other game companies deliver products on times and are able to predict release dates and stick to them.

Okay, Mulder.

Companies with 4 people? Made up of people working part time? Go ahead and nerd rage all you want, but I think you expected way too much from them. And if you say "I'm taking them at their word", well...don't. That's ridiculous. Every new small business makes announcements and promises and falls short, over and over, until they get their footing. To take them literally and be upset when they don't make it is unrealistic. I NEVER expected them to release a thing in 2015, and just shook my head at their naive enthusiasm.
You can point and shout "But YOU said...!" at them all you want like an 8 yr old whose parents said they could have dessert and then recanted, it's pointless (like your indignation makes them work faster or something? Like they did it already and are not releasing anything on purpose just to drive you crazy?) and self-defeating because the ONLY thing it could possibly accomplish is less engagement with our community.

Now you want to complain about unresolved issues with the Mig-21, go ahead. You bought it, you're using it, it's not doing what it should, you have every right to hammer at them to fix it. But to complain about their future plans not coming to fruition? Ever wail at Toyota because their 2016 SUV line didn't come out when Honda's did in late 2015, and you had to wait till early 2016 to see it? No? Of course not, because it makes no sense. You didn't pay for it, you owe them nothing, they owe you nothing in that regard. If they miss the timetable for when you want to buy, you go elsewhere or you wait. You don't waste time making snide remarks online to the CEO of Toyota.

Also, they've said explicitly they've been working on terrains to the detriment of the planes. Now you may be thrilled at the prospect of flying the F-14 solely in the Black Sea...but I'm not. Frankly, we need new terrains a hell of a lot more than we need a new plane, as much as I like the F-14. I'm not even looking at any WWII birds until we have a WWII theater and appropriate AI non-flyables, ground units, and ships to interact with. My P-51D does zero for me and will continue to do so until that happens. The Viggen will be a great companion to the MiG-21 and Mirage 2000...whenever it happens.




The Jedi Master

and this is why other developers are simply not saying anything until pre release phase nos.

Jedi, that's a complete load of rubbish.

You're basically saying that we should not put any trust into ED and 3rd parties at all to be able to carry out their work/jobs. Doesn't that make them incompetent?


They're selling us something, they're trying to entice us into an early buy (as every company does for any of their products) and even to the point where they're attempting to build up some excitement by announcing announcements of announcements for their products (and still not being able to pull that off)

It will be interesting to hear your reasoning on why they shouldn't be trusted or we shouldn't believe anything they say other than it's a small company with limited resources. Just to clarify, it's not the customer base pre-empting when we think they should have something ready....we accept that they're professional enough to be able to do their job don't we, I can't see why we wouldn't trust them to be able to incorporate effective and efficient planning as part of their job too. Too many people are willing to make far too many excuses for ED and 3rd parties when it comes to DCS when they wouldn't give the same slack to any other company and any other product. To be honest, it's baffling and quite comical how some people can magic up excuses at whim as to why these people/companies aren't able to deliver.



What's ED's excuse then?....or are they still a 'new small business'? How long do we give them before we can expect them to get their footing?

...which is probably the best strategy in gaming biz and I hope LN learns from recent experiences and goes this way.

Except LN didn't say anything until the pre-release phase, remember they were supposed to release two modules last year, they were supposed to make an announcement and flood us with screenshots, videos and previews which is in the pre-release phase and they couldn't even do that. Funny that they can and are willing to show incomplete ingame screenshots and in editor screenshots of the F-14 but they don't want to release pics/videos of a product that is 'due in the near future' because they don't want to disappoint us, but it is perfectly OK in their minds to tell us they are going to flood us with stuff and release nothing.

I will say it again. ED and 3rd parties could revoke their CP license tomorrow and demand we pay them more money and people like you would still find a way to justify why they have the right to do that.

Sounds like you believe they are going to release the F-14 this year. Looking at their wording, they 'hope' and are 'confident' for the second half of 2016 when their first estimate was late 2015, the 2nd quarter of 2016 and now second half of 2016.

That's not what he said. Like, at all.


Trust whoever you want, the fact is it'll be done when it's done, and when they get around to it, whenever that is, there'll be reviews and videos and screenshots and bug reports, and then you can actually build an opinion grounded in facts that are actually relevant, as opposed to the pure speculation you're doing now based solely on the delays and bumps they're hitting during development.
And no, delays are not an appropriate metric to judge the quality of a final product, at least not at all comparable to the media at release.

Ah, you guys can [edited]. I, for one, am going to buy the F-14 when it comes out. Heck, I'm probably going to pre-order it. No working weapons? That's fine! Not realistic avionics and flight model? That's good! I want to brake and I want that MiG to fly right by! I will be flying this baby low and fast past whatever tower I can find in the Black Sea while listening to Top Gun tunes. The only way they can make this more awesome is if they added DOA Beach Volleyball to the package!

It'll give me a few hours of entertainment but the little boy inside me doesn't care.

Okay, you guys can go back to your rants now.



Edit: Cmon Ice...you know better than that.

My .02. First, I backed the MiG-21 because the thought of a 50's fighter with advanced aerodynamic modeling and therefore all the vices and switchology nightmares you only ever got to read about was worth supporting. You absolutely fulfilled that dream. It is an absolute blast, totally worth the wait and I was and still am blown away every time I close the canopy. Even more often when I try to land.

I for one would be perfectly happy at this point with something like an option of a discount/free license for one or more of your upcoming products (depending on contribution tier) as a replacement for the physical awards.

Or I can take the physical stuff and buy the new planes when they are ready. You guys really showed a lot of grit and dedication to fulfill your promise. I respect that and you've earned my business. Only thing I feel bad about was knowing my original contribution didn't go to the final team.

Totally looking forward to the Viggen. One of the coolest planes I thought would never get a study sim. I am very pleased to know you are making it!

<cough> F-104 <cough>. You guys could do it better than anyone else, I have no doubt.

Well, I suppose moping like 5 year olds is easier to do than getting a grip and work out how to learn from dozens of identical mistakes. Would've been nice if ED has started actually forcing certain devs to issue refunds (looking at you, VEAO and AvioDev) or strip them of their 3rd party status.

Learn from their identical mistakes? Um, LN is breaking new ground. The first third party to work on a map, the first third party make a two seater combat jet (simplified trainers excluded), creating their own ground radar systems. LN does more than the other third parties. RAZBAM when asked about their next modules, they said they couldn't do anything about things like the A-7 until ED finished the ground radar. LN said 'We'll make our own goddamn radar'. They don't just make the planes then toss in ED code for the parts like other companies, they build their own. Of course they're going to run into delays, of course they're going to have problems. They're blazing new ground and powering through new mistakes and misteps because they're doing what no other third party is.

You latched on to those TWO WORDS??
That was light-hearted anyway... to go along with the rest of my post, but I can see how it would rub others the wrong way.

Back to taking pictures and keeping up with foreign relations...

Sorry to be a banwagon jumper... But I am in. I suspect our wagon will be full to capacity when the Tomcat is released. The Tomcat will be a Yardstick by witch all others sims are measured. Sort of like the Fishbed is...

Just remember that sarcasm in the form of written text doesn't always carry the same feel as spoken word. I was pretty sure you were not too serious...but there's a chance someone will take it the wrong way.

I'm talking about the general trend among all DCS developers of never, ever living up to their own release deadlines, as well as most other of their own deadlines.

I understand that, and I'm saying that in the case of some developers, that makes more sense than others. When you're breaking new ground with what is possible in the sim, you're going to run into problems, unexpected delays that you simply didn't foresee. The second and third runs through are much easier, since you have a general idea of how things go, but in the case of LN, they're creating whole new component systems, and it's proving to be a greater challenge than they realized, so of course their dates slipped. If they were just working on a module with the same sort of systems and characteristics as their earlier MiG-21 then i would have no sympathy, but they're not, they're doing stuff not even ED has done yet.

After reading many of these threads in which Dev X hasnt met a self-imposed deadline, the customer base either calls for their lynching or rescue.

What many don't notice is that these Devs are part time companies. Or at least that's what they claim to be. So, I'm a bit more understanding, to an extent. It doesn't make me like the delays any more than the rest, but I get it. However, if they continue to miss deadlines, then they truly need to ask themselves some tough management questions. And if it is part time, then they cannot expect full time prices on the products that are released in Beta status with drawn out, finalization schedules. As we've read, that is probably one of the most despised practices in this series.

Being in the sim business, I deal with our contractors directly to get something fixed within a prescribed time. Otherwise they'll push it aside to pursue other interests that make a profit. Maybe ED needs to impose a time limit on Beta status to ensure products are completed and not left in limbo. It would help to restore some trust with the community and possibly push more products out.

I've been burned by dev companies on many products over the years. So now I'm very leery of buying anything from them. I let me $$ speak for me and read a lot of reviews before buying, to ensure I'm getting what I want.

Just my $.02
Back to learning to fight in this confounded MiG-21

-Jeff

If DCS was the Battlefield series or the Call of Duty series y'all would be calling for their heads on a pike, delivering an unfinished game.

Just sayin'

In that case "we'd" have somewhat of a point because "we'd" be paying full price for each update every 2 or so years.

In case of DCS, there was so far one paid upgrade, all the others came for free for the last 8 years. Different genre, different communities, different monetization concepts, anything that's not different apart from being computer games?

lol, Bf4 was redonkulous, dont even compare them.

BF4 at launch was equivelent to A pre Alpha code dump to disk and fix later after they generate revenue from everyone that paid for it.

To an enduser, it might not seem that bad,, to someone that knows what went on on the inside... it was stupid crazy.

BF4 was the most rushed and delivered incomplete title Ive seen since 2003.

Bi Yearly Installments of the same content, and rebooted content, and pple throw money at them,

better yet, ppl throw money at EA Sports every year for updated rosters, and some GFX spitshine.

But EDs the bad guys.. shrug..


The MiG and LN are prolly the best 3rd Party Module/Team outside of ED/BST.

The only knocks people can have against them are delays in physical rewards, and TBH, they arent bound to even fulfill those, since the IGG was not theirs.

Seriously, whats the point in pushing for an Install DVD? the Software is updated on a frequency that would make the DVD obsolete before its even pressed/burned.

TShirts and stuff, ok, cool.

As for delays, they happen.

I dont see why ppl get so crazy over delays, its part of software development,

someone misses a pre-planned release window and everyone loses their friggen mind, do you guys go ballistic when other stuff is delayed outside of DCS realm I wonder? or do you simply do it here for the sake of garnering negative attention upon yourselves?

No Software is perfect, No developer is perfect, however DCSW and its modules are in constant development, so they will never be "done"

21 bestest module. Not only do they model the system function but also throw in the wear and tear stuff to reward mechanical sympathy and make it more a machine than something immune to abuse.

It's a shame that it's not quite done and inaccurate in places. Properly GCI and AI wingmen would really make the module shine.

Oh I see. So because ED aren't screwing us to the fullest extent imaginable (because they'd go bankrupt if they did), all the other ways they're screwing us are alright? Thanks for clearing that one up for me!

OMG!!! Me and Troll ("Troll and I") agreeing on something!! 2016 is going to be a magical year!!



You guys can be my wingman anytime!

BS. You can be mine.

Making light of the rewards is only hurting developers at this point. The tiered rewards structure is there to help put more money in the developers pocket to fund the game. The more developers that make a mockery of it and don't honor these rewards makes people shy away from future crowd funding efforts.

And the old "this product changed hands now...so we don't have to honor the original rewards" bs is getting old.

I don't care much about delayed announcements or screenshots etc...but when money has changed hands up front, honoring what you agreed to should be priority one. Don't offer rewards if the funding goal you set isn't enough to cover it.

In my mind this is a semi-moot point now. I think devs used the crowd funding route to get things up and running and now they have turned into nothing but a pain in the butt for both devs and costomers. I seriously doubt we will see crowd funding again in DCS, especially from established devs, pre-purchases not withstanding of coarse. I am satified with the LN/(that other company) campaign, I mean I got the mig for 19$, but I can see how the rewards thing would leave a sour taste with people looking forward to them. Hopefully new fledgling devs can find a different way cause I most likely will never participate in one again. All in all kudos to LN for trying to make things right.

I reached the level where for me it doesn't matter what LNS say will sell next year. LNS for me is now on par with VEAO and AvioDev. The difference is that VEAO stayed on that level from day one but LNS lowered itself there.

It may be a moot point for you but for many others it is most definitely not. Without the crowd funding would the project have even started? Did the devs have the money to start the project or to see it through until release? Developers are starting a business with other folks money, with the promise of rewards. When you take away the rewards after your project is funded you're pretty much spitting in the face of your backers. "Thanks for the startup cash but we lied about the rewards."
I seriously doubt we will see crowd funding in the normal sense again in DCS, because the Crowd have been burned too many times by this platform. We are seeing a kind of crowd funding with the release of betas and alphas for cash. Unfinished products for full price with the only reward being early access. And there are way too many folk willing to accept this business practice. It's so sad it's pitiful.

It seems to be game-industry wide too. Why do you think it is so prevalent?

Nate

And why did you ignore the first part of my post?

I didn't, I read it. I simply asked you a question.

Nate

It may be prevalent in the industry. But offering rewards as an insentive to fund a project then after the project is funded removing the rewards is not. It seems to be quite an acceptable practice within the DCS community. One that is defended with the thinnest of arguments. There is a quite apparent "I'm alright Jack" mindset within the community.
Thanks for funding the project for the rest of us. But hey if you'rd unhappy about being ripped off you shouldn't have Layed out so much money. It's just as well I'm all but done with DCS I'd hate to be in a squadron where the motto is I'm all right jack.

You seem to be collating ED and LN together. I was speaking about LN's failing to meet their announcement schedule for screenshots and all that marketing jazz for unreleased modules.

I was not talking about ED, that is not what this thread was about, was it?
I was not talking about LN's Mig-21, that is not what this thread was about, was it? Although I did specifically say if you have an issue with your copy of MiG-21 that you do have something to complain about as money was paid, yet you seem to imply I said the opposite. About ED. Which I most certainly did not.

I'm saying, and I'll put it alone in bold to be clear so no extraneous things are thrown in as "you mean X" when I don't:
You have no right to complain that LN failed to announce one or more products by the date they said they would because you didn't pay for it.
Do you have a receipt showing "paid LN $XXX for announcement of future releases to be delivered in 2015"? How about "paid LN $YYY for screenshots of a module that will likely be a Viggen?" No? What a surprise. Then what exactly does LN owe you?
Is releasing information about an upcoming product to you, for free, part of their job? It's part of marketing, but as any marketing expert will tell you, you market at a given window before a product release. Too late and it sits there with no one aware it was coming. Too early and anticipation will build, peak, and drop off by the time release occurs.

I'll be clear on this as well: I don't give a damn about their marketing acumen or lack thereof. They can suck horribly at marketing, I don't care. I may marvel at using Osama Bin Laden with a "I love LN!" caption as being profoundly stupid, but it won't change whether I buy it or not. I care about the module being a good value when I pay for it. Does it work as it should? Do I enjoy it for the amount I paid?

I cannot fathom the thought process "well this was released as a damn good airplane that is loads of fun for a reasonable price, but it took them months longer than it should have to announce it and show us marketing materials for it so I refuse to buy it or anything else from them, ever!!" Really? Does that make ANY sense to you? Well you seem to be advocating it, so I guess it does, but I'll stop you right here and say you will never convince me that is a reasonable stance to take.

A company owes you nothing as far as a product you have yet to pay for. For the MiG-21, or any other available module you paid for, yes, they owe you one that works. For the Viggen, Hornet, Corsair, or any other unreleased plane, zip! Condemning them for marketing missteps as being "incompetent" is ridiculous.

Have you ever been fired because you spilled some water on your clothes at lunchtime and had to wipe it up? I mean, how UNPROFESSIONAL of you to not be able to manage a simple thing like keeping water off your clothing! I'm sure they can only infer you were totally incompetent and throw you on the street immediately before you ruin the company's reputation for making quality products at an affordable price! Employees spilling water on themselves! The very idea!





The Jedi Master

That was one huge pile of straw you built there.

Crowdfunding has proven to be very unreliable. Many high-profile projects, taking in millions of dollars (none of them flight sims), have collapsed. It's a gamble, an investment in a product that may or may not happen. It's not a sure thing. If anyone thinks that, they're a fool that should rethink it closely.

I paid $20 in 2012 to get a Mig-21 in DCS. Years later I got it when the price was much higher. If I'd left that money in the bank, I'd have had maybe $20.37 at current interest rates. It was a great deal. I knew there was a chance I wouldn't see it, but it was only $20. I paid $15 for Takedown, and got it, and I overpaid about $14. I bought into Ground Branch, not sure how much, it was forever ago now, but I still haven't seen it. So I'm running 33% success with only 3 projects.

When luthier announced DCS WWII, I laughed! "Who would be fool enough to back THIS guy again after the twin disasters of Pacific Fighters, rescued by Oleg, and CloD, rescued by no one and leaving a bitter taste in many a mouth for the Il-2 series??" I laughed again when I saw how many people backed it. I shook my head in pity when I saw it inevitably collapse. They collected enough money to pay one programmer in Silicon Valley for an entire year! How could it NOT succeed?

People are angry at ED because they don't want to admit they should be angry at themselves.

Don't crowdfund. Don't buy betas. Don't buy early access. Don't get fooled again. Caveat emptor.





The Jedi Master

That was one awesome well-thought out response you made there. One gold star awarded. I can't possibly refute that.
I love how people think that by replying to a post that I took quite awhile to write with one pithy pointless sentence they think they somehow trumped it whilst ignoring everything I wrote.

So guess what? I'm right and you're wrong. Because.



The Jedi Master

So you composed a long post that was essentially nothing but a huge strawman.

Good on you then.

Sig worthy - not that I'd always follow it myself though, this emptor is weak

Nate

For me it was the Mig21 not being finished but filled with new bugs that did lowered LNS in my eyes in the first place. No skin template not even after EDGE was released and they said it was the thing that kept them from doing it. Ground handling remained arcadish although the other Russian jets from DCS got he realistic one, Radar and missile behavior (while fun and rewarding after taking some beating from F15s online) are and will remain without the "simulation" charisma. Various features messed up just in the launch days of the patches by distracted uploaders it seems. The so called misunderstanding of what controls the public wants and removal of some realistic controls to replace them with arcade only ones. Some new features bugged by new bugs (like the new advertised chute behavior being bugged by air leak). The new pipper that still has CCIP and still follows the IR target although has new realistic settings.

The announced but not announced but leaked planes news? I don't think they owe me something about them, only to their own reputation.

I've been following this thread with great amusement.
It's like groundhog day every time we post any content.

Your post is unfortunately full of disappointing factual inaccuracies.



Never said that. Ever.

We said the model upgrade(s) and UV changes were the limiting factor.
They still are (we just flipped every texture by 180 in the latest 1.5.2 patch)



Ground handling is currently perfectly realistic and 100% correct.
It has been that way since a couple of months after release.



Feel free to point out where our RP-22 simulation is incorrect.



This is probably the silliest complaint I have ever heard.

HEY! Leatherneck made a human error! Totally incompetent. (Alas, let's totally ignore the fact that both 1.5 and 2.0 were Beta/Alpha respectively and rapid changes were being rolled into the released builds)



I always love a good conspiracy theory.

We had EXTREMELY strong indication that toggle controls were far more popular. This is still the case. We try to refine usability as best as possible.

And what "so called" misunderstanding? What are you implying?
Tinfoil hat on: Leatherneck dumb down controls! It's Consoleitis- Run for your lives!



Sincere apologies for not realizing Joystick potentiometers are crap and would cause air leak bugs.
Sincere apologies also for bugs in a complex software product. It won't happen again. Ever.



New chute behaviour has absolutely 0 to do with a pneumatic air leak bug.
It refers to the chutes' behaviour on flight dynamics.

The air leak bug is only related to assigning an axis to the brakes or other pneumatic air systems. The potentiometer spikes occasionally, wasting air indefinately.



Nope. Not locally at least.

If it does on your end, submit a bugreport please.

Just as a reminder for everyone, feel free to stop by our public bugtracker:
https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.com/my_view_page.php

And just as another reminder

Is that a WIP changelog, or did I misinterpret "Re-Added several requested replaced inputs." as meaning that the inputs that were replaced with toggles a few months ago are back again? Really itching to get into the -21 again, but I really couldn't stand all those toggles last time I tried it.

Some are back, some are OTW back.

Were not talking about anybody else here but ED and their third parties. Not talking about "high profile projects, taking in millions of dollars." Not talking about collapsed projects. We're talking about successfully backed projects that are still being developed, where the developers have taken and used the "crowds" money to produce products that they are now making money from. I'll say it again we are not talking about collapsed projects. The crowd successfully funded the projects due to the promised rewards. Now the rewards have been slashed yet the projects are making money.
Who would be a fool to back luthier again? Who would be a fool to back ED again as their name WAS and STILL is all over the WW2 kickstarter page.
I get it Jedi, you're an ED defender, they can do no wrong in your eyes, that is painfully obvious, but you cannot slam luthier and the backers without laying any blame on ED. It is a totally blinkered and biased point of view.

I have only participated in two crowdfunding projects: the MiG-21bis and DCS WW2. With the MiG-21bis, I got 100% of what I expected but at the cost of years of delays and excuses. Overall, a win, but still a bit of a bad taste. With DCS WW2, I knew better, but the cost versus the payoff was too good to pass up. In the end, for $40 I got the Fw190 and the Bf109. Not as good as the promised 5 aircraft and again full of delays and excuses, but compared to the $40-$50 I paid for other DCS aircraft, it was a good deal that I don't regret one bit. I have also bought into all of the 3rd party pre-release offers. So far, only VEAO and AvioDev have fallen short of my overall expectations. But the delays and excuses don't mean that they won't ultimately come through like Leatherneck did, so I won't pass judgement on them unless they give up or fold before finishing the Hawk, P-40F, and C-101. Simple flight models aren't what I paid for and I would demand a refund if a decent flight model is never released.

Thanks man, great to hear!

Thank you for replying. You shouldn't be so much amused about public concerns, giving the fact public is not that informed about LNS (or any other software producer) internal development, concerns are just that... concerns not best jokes. Maybe just to see if there's a seed of truth about them.




Please don't use "attorneys" strategies. It is enough to imply this by few posts and the user expectations will be different than stating for example on the box of the product: "Template will not be ready not even after a year after release and not even after EDGE will be released". I am sure you couldn't foreseen it but just to see the difference... For sure it wouldn't be any doubt isn't it? And also it would have been a different public "emotion" than after this:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2186719&postcount=16

and this:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2232422&postcount=30




"If you say so." Ground handling is different than Mig15 or L39 by not requiring to hold brake to steer at very low speeds. Mig15 and L39 are behaving the same.



You are right. I can't "point out" where is incorrect. If I could I wouldn't wasted my time playing a "simulation". But beyond each ones trade... It was discussed several times that the R3R missile from Mig21 inventory is over what the real one could do. I had a small extract from a tacview record where the behavior would be more clearly visible but somehow is lost. However you can see the same action recorded in game via Shaddowplay, just jump to min 9:50 if the link doesn't do that for you

https://youtu.be/jKCoeQEkWEQ?t=9m50s

And observe how the second missile turns immediately after launch towards a hard turning F15 that was popping counter measures also. The missile tracked and connected perfectly. Now you can say is just the missile or maybe just one time... I... as an untrained in this field can say just that it could be both, missile and radar as the missile without the radar would be nothing in this case.

It was my very first enemy aircraft shot down online with Mig21 and the problem was pointed out by GGTharos user iirc. He seems to know a bit more than me in this aspect and if necessary I could give him a message to "testify" his observations about the R3R and probably the radar.

Secondly. Maybe is not a mistake but I found it a bit odd that with Su27/Mig29 you can't IFF a jamming target but with Mig21 you can't perfectly fine do that.




Why is silly to point that errors were repeated several patches due to same "human errors"?

I thought it looked more silly to post how finally the tacnumbers problem are solved and then all you could see on the plane after patch were wholes. Or the activation problem that was also finally fixed... but you forgot to mention... it wasn't actually if you played all 3 versions of the game. And still appears as you said in very few cases even today.



I think you can do a survey and find out that most players play this game with mouse and keyboard and maybe a cheap joystick... is this meaning that HOTAS support should be thrown out? How about headtracking? Why bother with it... out!
All you needed to do was to ADD stuff not replace just like the other modules have a plethora of choices for everyone. Take special note on how BST makes the controls for each options possible, axes/toggles/multi position/advancing buttons etc. For example... You have a weapon selector switch that turns left and right and all you could imagine was 11 separate buttons but somehow you still don't get the TWO most obvious buttons that were actually needed beside the super 11. And you want me not to interpret your post when the removal of controls was introduced as "so called misunderstanding"? It is a so called because somebody that understood the problem and the issues raised would have figured out that the users want more options not other options only.




Blame it on us... it's OK. We must have had invisible spikes on the axis (all of us) that made small invisible pulls on brake lever and quickly emptied the air bottle.




I know... but it does look funny isn't it? To say the new chute is so and so only to end up in the dirt at the end of the runway because of a... spike.





I'll do another test. But last time (quite long time) I flew Mig21 the pipper was following the target.

Btw, the bugtracker is really a good idea. I didn't post on it because of lack of time and the good job the other users do.

PS Sorry to reply like a stalker at almost 4AM local time but... I am sick... If I lay down to sleep I start coughing and disturb woman's sleep, so I clap keys .

I like the MiG-21. As a poster once said, "If LNS put out a donkey cart I would pre order"

Cobra, Thank You for the MiG and its updates. This thing is cool. Best 3rd party stuff. We cant wait for more. We will line up to buy The Donkey Cart.

I am amused, because quarter over quarter our approval seems to rise.
This is quite clearly evident from various data. The recent hoggit survey is a good indicator.

Yet -- on SimHQ; we're the devil incarnate. It can be somewhat macabre to read.

We make mistakes. Everyone does, we're all human, after all.
I don't foresee any significant changes in how we conduct ourselves or our business, however.

We have an exciting product line in development and we are well on the way of clearing the last issues with the MiG-21.



You can find dozens of examples of similar changes in timelines from us.
Please don't be surprised if it is a thing in the future.

The cost of honesty and transparent development is inaccurate information.





The MiG-21 becomes rudder responsive at the exact speed it does in real life.
There is not much more to it.



We have acknowledged the necessity to slightly amend the R-3.
You alluded to far more than a slightly overpowered missile.

IFF is simplified. This has always been the case and will probably continue to be.



It is silly because:
a) DCS World 2.0 was in its first BETA stages.
b) There were several patches in a short period of time. Testing in such situations is minimal and mistakes are not caught in time.
c) You were warned of severe bugs due to the nature and massive changes in DCSW 2.0 - and the MiG-21 build

We had 2 incorrect uploads, both within a week of eachother. None since then.
Both of these commit issues were on an Alpha/Beta versions of DCS.

The Tac Number 'solution' posted was not meant to be final.
It was a stop-gap post because the wrong description .ext's were uploaded from a deprecated local build.

The activation was fixed.
Sometimes things fixed break backwards compatability.

Expect this kind of thing in the future too.



I'm not blaming it on you.
I am blaming a BUG on an unforeseen HARDWARE issue. One that did not occur locally.

If you're going to assume I'm lying every time I give you information about why a bug occurred; I may as well stop.



This is honestly the very tiniest of bugs and is already gone, just like hundreds of others before it.
Not sure what the relevance is to anything.



There is much work to be done, so I am up too.
Get better soon!

You know what? I'm alright Jack. I will buy Betas. Or else how could I fly DCS? And if I believe in a product, I will fund it.

Folks on SimHQ have bought your product just like anywhere else...they just don't have to carefully phrase and sugarcoat their concerns to be heard here.

Regardless, I'm sure zaelu and others appreciate the feedback and you taking the time to explain certain concerns.

Silence and lack of feedback can be frustrating for those who really enjoy your product and are looking for specific answers on problems they are experiencing.

Re. gunsight pipper in the -21, it does follow the target in tutorial mission for example, but that's because tutorial missions have some forced difficulty and gameplay options, different from Your personal settings (caught myself noting that lately and thinking "WTF, I though I had realistic pipper option enabled??").

Thank you Nickolas for take your time and write here, in an freedom of speech environment.

I am sure that LNS will release a fantastic Corsair, but Fished demostrated that ATM LNS is nor ready a modern fighter.

The Fishbed isn't a modern fighter, It have a very simple avionics, but LNS MiG-21 lacks a good simulation of:

• ASP-PDF-M Gunsight
• RSBN-4N system
• MRP-56 Beacon system
• RSIU-5V Radio
• R-802V Radio
• ARK-10 ADF system

On the other hand is a good Eye-candy (FSX user we know a lot about this kind of aircrafts), and the AFM is superb IMO.

In my Squadron we grounded the entire fleet of LNS MIG-21 due to the problems in avionics (we can't perform a IFR flights) until furhter fixes.

But Hey!!! All it's Ok.

P.S. All simmers want a strong LNS but with tons of complacency this goal cannot be achieved.

Well said!

Why does it matter? At all? It'd be nice if these modules had the sort of big time publisher backing that other genres enjoy, but they don't. Delays are not only to be expected, but they're going to be the norm. All we can really do is hope they reach their deadline. In the likely event they don't, you shrug it off.

I'm more concerned with AvioDev's delivery of C-101's update. Why? Because, I've put money into it. As should everyone who's paid into C-101 and Hawk. I've yet to preorder Viggen, Corsair, or Tomcat. LNS delivered great on the MiG and have supported it in a satisfactory manner. I'd imagine their other offerings will get the same attention.

Why get upset over something that you've yet to actually put money into? That's silly. You should never be upset at the inability to spend money on a video game. You should never need to buy video games, period. Full stop. You can wait. If you got money set aside for these that's been deemed disposable income, then spend it on something else. What's the worst that could happen? The module that was delayed is coming out in 2 weeks and now you don't have the cash for it? Again, you can wait. What do you lose by not having it? Your teamspeak buds get to flaunt it for a while and you don't have it? Gotta have the latest and greatest?

We may be playing with toys, but these are urges that are best left for kids.

You do realise its not all about money and budgeting?

As for saying delays are expected and are going to be the norm? Erm no....if we trust devs to produce quality flightsims then I don't think its unfair to also put the same trust into them to deliver on time to the timelines that they publish.

Why are people prepared to accept one but not the other? Why are people not only accepting lame excuses from ED and 3rd parties but also making excuses on their behalf!

God help ED if they ever get competition from a developer that produces equally good simulations but also have the ability to plan efficiently, deliver on time and can communicate with their user base. They'd be history overnight.

Now that the activation issues are sorted the MIG-21 is an excellent module. I've been playing it a lot as of late. They could drop the humor from the tutorials though. In some instances the joke is just as long as the actual information and it isn't even funny. Referring to the ramp start tutorial, which I just reviewed again. Still may require the start up cheat though.

Yes it is. For a developer this small? Dealing with a niche consumer audience? It absolutely is.

Maybe, but the optimist in me is hoping that once things settle down a bit, with the new engine and all, and as developers gain experiance with DCS that they will get better at projecting accurate dates ahead of time.

Nooo the tutorial humor is the best.

Well, it's simple if all deadlines will be missed....they should use the same Public Relations policy than BST.

Yeah, Aviodev had some problems in 2015 as you can read in the thread about VEAO Hawk AFM. Tango the main coder (Tango worked for Aviodev and VEAO) have some problems and left DCS World. Now Aviodev have a new coder.

These guys have a great idea about C-101 and I hope they can do it.


Yeap, I agree, LNS MiG-21 bis is great for play....Like SIMS or Microsoft FLIGHT, but hey dude, this webpage is SimHQ, DCS means Digital Combat Simulator .

I agree with you, it's a good game, but sadly is a very bad simulator.

Which public release simulator has recreated those systems? Please, let me know. I'll go out and buy it right now.

What public release simulator has promised those systems?

man, looking at these threads makes me so glad i'm not developing flight simulation products. easily the most unappreciative, critical group of customers there could be, and the profit they make is probably barely enough to keep themselves eating boxed macaroni and cheese.

bleh.

i've been having fun with the mig-21, what can I say.

According to Cobras announcement of the new team members it is the profits from the Mig21 that allowed them to hire more people along with 'temps' for special stuff. So apparently they are making decent money actually.

I have no ill will toward LNS. They are progressing, perhaps slowly for my taste, but nicely toward an acceptable simulation of the airplane. What I don't accept is a fan-atic telling me that wanting the sim to be completed is unreasonable. The module is incomplete and wrong in several aspects. It's not good enough. It's good enough for now.

When you know enough about the airplane where the DCS module isn't your authoritative/only source of information, the inaccuracies are constant and a little grating. Ignorance truly is bliss. It's just like seeing a movie about a subject you know a lot about.

I appreciate the LNS parking lot is not filled with Lamborghinis. Being their passion is a significant part of what drives products like these. And it shows. So far it's a lovingly crafted item and they seem more enthusiastic to continue making it great than I am about demanding it.

I have the MiG-21bis flight manual. I don't know it as well as the various F-4 flight manuals that I have read cover to cover repeatedly, but I know the MiG-21bis about as well as an armchair pilot can. Prior to this DCS Module, the closest combat simulation of any MiG-21 worth flying were all the SF series mods with really great cockpits, but barely functional "lite" avionics. For all its flaws, the LNS MiG-21bis is not only the best combat capable simulation of this aircraft ever released to the public, but the best of any aircraft of its generation (pre-USA teen fighters).

It is not perfect. You can't exactly follow the real-world checklists. The navigation/communication systems are incomplete or inoperative. But for me, the gunsight isn't anything special -- pretty much a P-51 gyro sight with the option to use radar as a range input per the DCS F-86F. I learned and understood how the range scales at the top of the sight were supposed to work when I started flying the MiG-21 in the Strike Fighter series. I was perplexed when after all these years of lite simming, my DCS quality ride worked even worse than the SF2 sight! I can understand incorrectly modeling the gyro equations, but the functionality as originally released was not even close to what the manual says or common sense dictates.

Progress has been made. But with a full plate of already delayed/income generating future releases on the table, how much more time can or will be spent fixing/improving the MiG-21? If they can't even get the much simpler MiG-21 right, how is the F-14 or Viggen even going to come close to the expectations of DCS customers? Waiting for the MiG-21 was a slow painful ride. Waiting for the current round of fixes was just as slow and painful. Is the MiG-21 going to get any better any time soon? Or is it going to be declared "finished" and sold "as is"?

I already love it in its current state, but the day I can complete 95% of the manual procedures with little or no deviations by the simulated version would be the day it meets the my expectations of the originally promised aircraft. Of course, it was also promised that only a final, 100% bug free aircraft would be delivered -- no beta release necessary. I knew that wasn't going to happen from the day I read it.

The answer is easily accessible.

http://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.com

And from that link the answer is that there are still quite a few bugs you are tracking and planning on fixing. It could take a dedicated programmer some time to work through all of those. I won't be holding my breath.

For now, I have no choice but to keep doing what I have been doing most of the time: flying the MiG-21 according to the LNS flight manual rather than the real one and enjoying the great flight modeling and detailed cockpit. But I will maintain hope that you can raise the bar even higher that you have already set for all other DCS third parties.

As I principally fly intercept and dogfight type missions, the only things that are obvious and bothersome are the highly effective missiles and the quirky gunsight. But I do perform cold starts on most of my missions and would like to know that if I ever got into a real MiG-21, that I would have no trouble getting the engine started and safely taxiing/taking off/landing other than my lack of experience with the feeling/sensitivity of the real controls.

Except that 23 issues have been resolved or closed in the last two weeks.
We have a proven track record that stretches all the way to September 2014.

Any comment on how missile effectiveness will look Cobra? The Atoll has better reliability than AIM-9Ms right now, that seems quite strange.

AFAIK that is up to ED and not 3rd Party teams.

Thanks for all feedback Cobra, now get back to that Viggen so I can Virgo the living carpet out of Naval Infantry trying to capture Gotland.

"Website News Section
A long overdue update to our website in the form of a new News section is now available.
If you find it difficult or time consuming to follow the forums or hunt down updates from us; we'll be cross posting anything relevant to this page.
This includes smaller announcements such as notices and warnings.

We've been fairly quiet over the course of 2015; with a mere half a dozen major updates scattered across the year, but this is of course has only been a temporary period that is soon coming to a close.
Thus, heavy use and far denser updates on this page are to be expected.

www.leatherneck-sim.com/news

EDIT: Will go live on the 1st. I broke it."

What an awesome feature to have, about freaking time. Just to save some folks the trouble of reading the news section and be caught up. Here is a TLDR;

"Inga resultat hittades
Sidan du begärde kunde inte hittas. Försök förfina din sökning eller använd navigeringen ovan för att lokalisera inlägget."

Translated means, nothing found.

Once again Cobra makes a big post and is 'late' delivering.

What happened to the news section

You broke it... obviously.

I was just holding back so that I could enjoy your inevitable post on the subject.

Wow...just looking at the display symbology leads me to believe that, even if I did buy something like this, I would never be able to figure out how to use it. It took me about 2.5 years to become a Combat Mission Ready Aviator. If this thing turns out as realistic as it looks like its going to be, I'm not sure how someone would even do it without the benefit of an instructor...not to mention hundreds of hours to figure out how to run the mech correctly. I think I'd probably wind up single if I even tried. Hats off to the developers though...looks like a lot of work.

So does that mean we can expect it tomorrow?
Or was that just a meaningless post to avoid answering the question?

Well considering that it still isn't avail right now. I think you have your answer.

Cobra: Do you just put stuff in your updates as filler to make them longer and to make it seem as though you are actually giving the community information when in fact you aren't. I am also referring to the 'you will be flooded with screenshots, videos and previews' statement, which of course you failed to deliver.

I think they do... Like VEAO huge shrinking disapearing list of planes and maps

...or they are trolling. I mean...

http://www.leatherneck-sim.com/news

Mustang: Yes. Exactly. You caught me. Darn!



Of course I did. No surprise there.
In your twisted mind and in ignorance of actual intentions, of course.

This is more amusing than ignoring the silliness here- let's continue!

So then since you want to continue, where is the news site that was supposed to go live on the 1st.

So you think it is silly that you make claims during your 'every once in a while' updates and then fail to live up to them. That speaks volumes. Of course I will give you credit, you sure have a way with making 'attacks' on me to cover up your own statements. Kinda like the statement in your last update that you failed to deliver one new aircraft last year when you had said multiple times you guys were going to deliver two aircraft last year, but those are just details and it is much easier to just deliver funny offhanded quips at people than to deliver actual stuff you said you were going to.

BTW, I do have my hip-waders ready for the flood.

The only thing that speaks volume is your relentless will to complain about the most TRIVIAL things ever.

Cobra, thanks for adjusting your last comment which wasn't allowed. SO thanks again for removing it.

Let me just say one thing.

These boards allow disgruntled comments with regards to customers thoughts towards products whether they are justified or not.

Yes it can be frustrating at times. Disregarding who is right or wrong, I would like to commend you for showing professionalism in changing your previous post and continuing to post here.

UNLIKE SOME OTHER DEVS WHO NO LONGER POST HERE BECUASE OF CHILDISH BEHAVIOUR,

I commend those that can MAN UP enough to have an adult conversation and ride some criticism in order to reach a greater consumer base and advise those of us who still want to be informed.

I only hope you keep this up and show THOSE CHILDISH OTHER DEVS the error in what they have done and don't alienate some customer base because of criticisms on a forum board. Just remember the voice of a few MAY OR MAY NOT speak for the remainder of us.


At the end of the day "sticks and stones" and all that.

The only thing that speaks volume is your relentless will to complain about the most TRIVIAL things ever.[/quote]

If the news site was so trivial , why was it included in the New Years Eve update and then not even actioned.

It's charming but the last half dozen bits of info out of LNS have been things like "uploaded the wrong textures" "typed the file path wrong" "submitted the wrong build version" "website 404".

I imagined if I visited the physical studio it would just be people slipping on banana peels and getting hit in the face with cream pies while Yakkity Sax was on the PA. I appreciate the public-facing bug tracker but the occasional comic errors are getting thematic.

What a wonderfully confirmation biased influenced point of view.

You've ignored dozens of fixes, updates, and thousands of hours of work invested in lieu of- in your own words: two botched repository syncs and one single instance of a sub-site not being launched yet.

The Cream-pie is delicious and the Yakety sax is drowned out by our sky-high approval ratings.

How convenient of you to forgot the two updates scheduled for Sep and Oct and the two missed release years of the Viggen and the Corsair. And who can forget proclamation that we would be flooded with screenshots, videos and movies. And lets not forget the missing physical rewards from the crowdfunding (that have now potentially changed). And I can't be 100% sure but wasn't there supposed to be a template(s) for repainting the Mig21 by now.

"Most of the team's focus has currently been on our two upcoming aircraft that are not the F-14.
We hope to announce one of these, which is part of a larger project during the month of September, and the other in October. "

Sky high approval ratings? If you carry on Missing the mark your going to get the reputation of a team that cannot be taken at their word. In the dcs market where alpha/betas are the norm a reputation like that is not going to sell merchandise no matter what aircraft you decide to release. The thing about ratings is that they change. You're coming across as having nothing but contempt for mustang and others by continually ignoring his question and throwing out some contemptuous remark. These are your customers. Do you really think that is good pr?

It's only interpreted as convenient for you - because for us, delaying things has nothing to do with any sort of clownish incompetence. It's the price you pay for open communication.

Except for you, obviously.

Sorry - we've fullfiled far more promises than we've missed. They're just never ever credited. Here, anyways.

It's quite difficult to give credit where it is due when you live in a world of eternal pessimism.

Ratings wise, I'll trust the judgement of hundreds of people polled in stark contrast to the voices proclaiming incompetence or malice.



I'll stop being 'contemptious' when the tone changes into something that facilitates constructive discussion.
Until then - I'll keep taking the posts in a thread like this as a point of minor ridicule. There is nothing of substance to discuss; apart from some dedicated and borderline obsessive malicious intent and desire to feel high and mighty.

Being perfectly civil has grown rather tiring, as it stretches all the way back to being accused of posting 'bullshots' back before the MiG-21 released.

Don't expect me to not stand up for our business or products.

Cobra, it's not worth it.

Rest assured that the people who actually play and enjoy DCS appreciate all your hard work. You won't find many left on this forum though.

Many thanks!
Hope you'll be onboard with the Viggen and Cat.

I think if you look around these forums you'll find quite a lot of positive posts regarding LN. If you choose to ignore those it's not the simhq communities fault. You seem to want to focus on the negative posts and completely ignore the positive. It's almost narcissistic.
Mustang asked about your Website News Section and I have yet to see you answer his question. The one person in that discussion being unconstructive was you.

No - I'm not ignorant to those posts and I appreciate them.

I began posting in this thread because of factually incorrect statements.

I suggest you re-read Mustang's first post about the News section and it should become very clear as to why I choose to avoid giving a proper answer. Something I have done time and time again, even via PM to Mustang personally. I don't really have the urge to respond to such overhwelming negativity and agression anymore.

Pardon my ignorance but I don't recall a great deal of recent fixes from the customer's point of view. There were fixes of course like the radio not working without the engine running but those don't count as progress if one patch broke it and the next one fixed it. Same with the Star Force activation changeover. Yes, it's different now but unless you know the difference in activation schemes it was "worked before, then didn't, then did: back to square one" for the layman.

If you asked for ten noticeable bugs of the MiG-21 8 months ago, I might respond:
1. Radar-ranging gun solution
2. Cockpit flood lights
3. Hypoxia
4. Radar warm up
5. Stabilization mode
6. Kh-66
7. SPS-141
8. SPO-10
9. RSBN
10. Radio channel numbers

I'm sure there are a lot of real fixes I didn't notice and even more in some internal build which hasn't seen the public eye yet. But it cannot be denied there was a sufficient list of things missing/wrong a long time ago that haven't changed at all.

I like the MiG-21. It is my favorite module I think second in complexity only to the A-10C. I want it to be indistinguishable from the real airplane. This is just enthusiasm for that desire.

Ya I've been kicking the tires of the Mig 21, really tempted to pick this one up

Yes, and those are legit complaints. Things in a product you paid for that are lacking.
So why is this thread full of nonsense about screenshots and website updates and other crap? Why the focus on trivial meaningless things when there are actual issues to be discussed? Even if it's nothing more than Cobra saying "still working on them" or whatever, it at least has SUBSTANCE. Those are the kinds of things that should be posted here.
Making 100 posts about the gun radar would be annoying but at least have SOME merit instead of the 100 "where's the pictures and announcement?" (said in a whiny 5 yr old's voice) posts we're seeing. At least people could discuss what is wrong, how to mitigate or work around it, and possibly get Cobra or someone to chime in with something useful about how it will be addressed.


LN missed a self-imposed deadline to publish some pictures? Yeah, demand their heads NOW. Demand a refund for what you paid to see those pictures. Here, I'll give it to you. Every dollar you paid for that announcement has been returned to your bank account, go check.

If your major complaint about LN is about promises made to release info about future products, you have some kind of serious first-world entitlement issues. Get over yourself. No one thinks you're as important as you do. In fact, we know you're not. You gain nothing by harping on trivialities, no one appreciates your efforts, you not only do not gain respect, you lose it. Stop thinking your relentless droning is some kind of righteous crusade--because it only inspires me to post this in return, and for some reason you HATE it when I point out how badly you're wasting your time. I do delight in pointing out that you are, though.




The Jedi Master

Jedi, does every single one of your posts have to include condescending nonesense?

The flipside is that getting so worked up about a negative post about a product and aiming petty insults at someone offers no more progression than what you see as someone complaining in a 'whiny 5 year old's voice'.

Perhaps if LN hadn't built up their potential release by hyping up something that they thought needing an announcement for an announcement that would be made later in the year together with statements about a load of progress updates and a barrage of screenshots......then they wouldn't have people asking where it is when it has failed to appear 5 months later.

What probably doesn't help their cause or potential sales is someone involved in the development hiding behind questions, refusing to answer and then being rude and confrontational with people who would be potential customers.

I'm all for devs being on forum boards, but seriously if they're going to react badly to questions about their products or announcements (especially those that are late/delayed) then they should also be aware that they aren't helping their cause by coming across as insensitive to the very people they will be trying to sell their products to.

No matter how good a product is, bad customer relations will turn some people away. I've looked several times at LN products......based on this thread, some of the responses within and previous threads in the past is enough to make me give LN products a wide berth. If trust diminishes, then so does my willingness to support them with my wallet.

You know what, i share jedi's sentiments.

I personally couldn't give a rats left testicle about an announcement, an upcoming announcement, or a delayed announcement.

Hell i have been waiting ages for the f18. I don't give a steaming pile of monkey excrement about announcements on it, i just want to know when its released and what god damned state its in.

Really, are announcements of unreleased products that important versus items that range from fantastical to dire need of repairing on released products that you have spent money on.

I don't know, maybe my priorities are skewed, but i don't think so.

I fully agree with Jedi.

I will wait, I will see, and if I like what I see and have the money on hand, I will buy.

Hype and generally getting worked up about announcements, are a waste of time in my opinion.
That the Mig took a while to get most of it's important functionality and optimization done, with some work still left, is regrettable, though somewhat expected, all things considered. I hope the new stuff will be in a better state at release, but I will wait, rather than judge now.

"Somewhat expected". THAT is the problem with this platform.
Cobra releases a long list of bugs and fixes and expects his customers to be impressed at the work they've done since release. Some customers are I guess. Me, personally, i see it as very poor QC, a release of a buggy piece of software. Those that express any dissatisfaction are treated like ungrateful children. Some work still left to do? How long has the 21 been for sale and there is still work to do while they announce 3 new modules? Two of those were leaked before cobra and crew get to announce what they were after watching and no doubt enjoying everybody trying to guess what they were. How embarrassing.

Terribly so. I think I'm pretty close to dying of shame.

Dude you're going to have to grow a thicker skin and some humility if you're going to be a developer.
Take this one thread, there are many folk defending your company and practices, only once have you thanked anyone for it. Yet you have on many occasions replied to the doubters. That speaks volumes to me. It's as if the gratitude of your customers is expected and criticism an abhorrence. Of the 3 announced modules only one interests me. But due to your PR and expectations of the community I'm going to find it very hard to purchase it once it's finished.

Critiscism?

You have to be kidding.

I really don't consider many of the negative posts herein to be critiscism.
There's a big difference between being critical and being blatantly malicious.

Let me illustrate:

"Cobra- do you always fill your posts with tons of #%&*$# to make it longer? You're just going to fail at everything you write anyways, as always"

vs

"Cobra- it would be preferable if you shortened your updates and tried to cut some of the 'fluff'. There is less information in your post than what it seems."

You really have not read the majority of my posts or communicated with me via E-mail if you believe I'm not humble.

Dying of shame. No, but embarrassed , you should be. You produced a great module (the best in DCS imho) under trying circumstances (with Beczl leaving etc) and although it had (has) a few bugs, overall a top quality release (especially if you compare it to others. But frankly your handling of the next two modules, the big proclamations, the announcements of announcements, the delays of simple things like screenshots and utmost, the decisions in the first place to hold off on anything regarding those two modules while building up massive amounts of hype. Your teams programming skills , modelling and texturing are second to none, including ED , your PR prowess on the other hand could use a lot of work. I wonder if perhaps you forget sometimes you are speaking to potential customers for a product you are trying to sell and not to your best friends who you are going to be giving a gift. You told me in private chat some time ago that you used to be in my position a little while ago, waiting for releases. Perhaps it is time for you to put yourself back in that perspective before typing up those updates or forums posts and ask.

"What can I actually deliver in the timeframe I am announcing"
"Is this info for the benefit of my potential customers or for the benefit of my own ego"
"Am I typing this so that my sky high ratings will remain there"

It is really bad form to pretend you are quoting someone and then change their words.

This is what was actually said in that post

"Cobra: Do you just put stuff in your updates as filler to make them longer and to make it seem as though you are actually giving the community information when in fact you aren't.

I think i wouldn't be embarrased if 10 nagging nancies out of a few thousand users in my customer base told me i should be embarrased because they say so...

I appreciate your nice comments about our product.

All I ask is that you try to remember what has been stated.

For example; you keep bringing up that our announcements are delayed. Yes- they are, and it sucks; but they were noted as delayed back in September. That hasn't changed, and bringing it up every time the discussion revolves around us has very little relevance.

It's pointless for me to update you every week with a post saying: Yep, still delayed.

As for maintaining accuracy of announcements, we can improve there, but the price paid for open development is simply inaccurate statements or projections.

I am not a seer, thus I am not embarrased.

That is called "Believing your own press"

And who said "Cobra- do you always fill your posts with tons of #%&*$# to make it longer? You're just going to fail at everything you write anyways, as always" in those exact words? Your defensive stance is sounding paranoid. You're going to get attacked just as you're going to get thanked, that's the nature of the internet. Everybody is different and everybody has a different expectation. It is a credit to you that you continue to return to these forums to defend your company and product but it would also be a great credit to you, not to mention great pr to return to these forums to thank your defenders.

No; it's just amalgamation of several posts in just this thread alone.

Meh, i'm a dsp guy, i only start looking for trends after filtering for noise.

Where did you announce this delay in Sep. Are you talking about the mini update in Sep. Because if you are, this is what was said in Sep

"Most of the team's focus has currently been on our two upcoming aircraft that are not the F-14.
We hope to announce one of these, which is part of a larger project during the month of September, and the other in October."

And who said "Cobra- do you always fill your posts with tons of #%&*$# to make it longer? You're just going to fail at everything you write anyways, as always" in those exact words? Your defensive stance is sounding paranoid. You're going to get attacked just as you're going to get thanked, that's the nature of the internet. Everybody is different and everybody has a different expectation. It is a credit to you that you continue to return to these forums to defend your company and product but it would also be a great credit to you, not to mention great pr to return to these forums to thank your defenders and fans.

One example of hundreds.
Your view is limited to SimHQ (where the discussions are overtly negative, most of the time)

https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments...hr77d?context=3

No. I did this in various posts across the forums and on hoggit.

In any case, I appreciate the critiscism, but I'll have to eject from this discussion and get back to work.

I hope you'll enjoy what we release, when we (eventually) do so.

Before you leave, is there any info about the 'news' subsection of the site?

It is a question that still hasn't been answered and was featured on the first post in this thread as part of the New Years Eve update.

It was allegedly ready yet now we're 16 days into January and none the wiser. The first page on this thread suggested there is a lot of updates/news to read about.

I broke the CSS on new years eve and haven't had time to take care of it yet.
It contains nothing new apart from a few background images.

Thank you for that, it's appreciated. That kind of post goes a lot further in increasing your pr than a sarcastic defensive one.

Someewhat expected because it's their first product as a team on a platform newly opened to third parties. While expecting a developer to release something in a proper state on the first go is nice, it's also grossly unrealistic in these conditions. But like I indicated in my post, it's still regrettable, and I probably won't ne as impulsive in the future. This is one of the reasons I haven't bought the Mirage yet.

And don't generalise this crap about being treated like ungrateful children, no one here said the Mig is issue free. Moaning about missed announcement dates is entirely different to complaining about unresolved bugs.

What is hoggit.

You don't see the correlation between missed announcement dates and unresolved bugs? You cannot see that if a company struggles to make an announcement date, that their unresolved bugs may, in some customers minds, be a long way from being resolved. That a companies reputation for missing deadlines even for announcements may impact on their sales? Why even you have just stated you wont be so impulsive in the future.
Moaning about missed announcement dates IS entirely different from complaining about unresolved bugs.
Complaining about missed announcements IS the same as complaining about unresolved bugs. It may not be important to you but to others it may well be. Personally I couldn't give a crap either way.

Maybe you read way too much into a missed date Redd?

Like I said I couldn't care less about missed announcements. However some folk do and have a right as paying customers to express their opinions without others finding their dissatisfaction so offensive as to try to belittle their grievance.

My point is that missed announcement dates say absolutely nothing about the product at release. That's my bane here. I've said this maybe twice before, but when the thing hits the store, there will be infinitely better material by which to judge it than the delays along the way.

Also:



I haven't seen any sales data that would confirm that. In fact, that's an attitude virtually unheard of in any other genre. The Witcher III got delayed, like twice or more, nobody said "Those guys better get their stuff together, else how could we trust them?!", at least not enough for me to see it on major gaming sites.

But this is all theory, the fact is people are drawing false equivalency between creating promotional material for a new product and supporting a released one. You think based on LN's behavior now that the Viggen might be in a poor state at release? Yes that's possible, but they could have made announcements and updates of all the little things on time and the plane could still be a buggy mess. The Mirage being an example of this. There's just no practical connection between marketing and development.

Personally, I'm optimistic about the Viggen because, being their second product, the snags and obstacles along the way will be more predictable and be planned around.

I agreed with you right up until the last sentence. It is the planning that is at issue. Since this is the second product (2nd and 3rd and 4th) they should be able to plan simple things like an announcement much better. Right now, it appears that the official announcement is still WAY off and with the changes happening every week or so in DCS, it could be 1/2 year before we see the Viggen / Corsair and what does this do to the F-14, they are now saying 2nd half of 2016 , which in reality means at best 15th of Dec but with the snags they are hitting just getting some stuff out for the much simpler Viggen and Corsair, I think only an optimist thinks we will see the F-14 before the middle of next year.

It is frustrating to wait so long to hear about their projects. Especially since they were going to announce at least one of them last April, I spent a lot of months thinking that info was just around the corner. It made things a lot less fun.

They are working on their 2nd, 3rd, and 4th products, but part of the problem is that they are trying to introduce a bunch of "new to DCS" features into their modules. That coupled with the constant changes to the DCS engine as 2.0 becomes the single/definitive version. If Leatherneck was going after low hanging fruit, like developing an F-5E that requires no new tech and fits into both NTTR and Strait of Hormuz, we would probably know more and it would be easier to estimate the development time. Of course, Belsimtek is working on the F-5E and we have no idea when it will be released or how far along it is...so maybe things wouldn't be better.

That said, I appreciate that they are developing modules that have theaters, new to DCS features, proper AI - that stuff makes a huge difference. But new stuff means it's very difficult to estimate development and delivery time, hard to anticipate problems when you are starting from scratch with something new. That's part of the issue with many of the upcoming projects for DCS and part of the reason that ZERO estimate has been given for the Hornet and no comment of what features will be ready when it's released (will we have carrier ops ready, etc?) Even the L-39, which is otherwise very conventional, is waiting for multi-crew to be fully integrated. All of this foundation-laying will open up the options for DCS in the future and development will probably be smoother year after year, but at the moment, no one (including ED and LNS) knows how long things will take. I think thats why it's so quiet around the ED forums with products in general, none of the developers are giving estimates. The mistake Leatherneck made was giving estimates at the beginning of 2015, because they felt confident in their progress thus far. Since then, they have been much more guarded and now they are very quiet indeed. Also, I doubt that either the Viggen or Corsair is actually a simple project, because of all the extra stuff they are trying to build into them. Frankly, both of these modules sound like game-changers to me, a complete sim built with the DCS engine, but they might not succeed and their new features may burden them. Won't know till they are released.

Still, I really like the things they've said in their New Years Update, especially the comment on more internal QA and actually getting all features and missions sorted before release. This actually gives me some confidence that their modules won't be a buggy mess. Plus, it seems that much of the Leatherneck staff are more-or-less full-time, with their livelihoods at stake you can bet that they want their projects to succeed (hence they really care about the first impression).

The Mirage 2000C was definitely incomplete on release and still is. Probably because they were committed to a December 2015 release and decided not to wait any longer. The recent patch really upgraded the flight model and I've spent most of the weekend flying it - so much better and it now feels like I hoped. But it would have made a much better impression if these features were there from the start. The alternative is not saying anything about release dates until it is ready and thoroughly vetted, which agitates people as well.

I doubt there is a right answer to this situation (besides the obvious - release a complete, bug-free module on-time that meets or exceeds all expectations...but definitely don't live in a world where this is possible, at least not right now).

-Nick

Some very nice stuff there. Yes, there was a lot in the New Years update the problem is that looking at history, I highly doubt most of the stuff will come true. With regards to updates. On Sep 2nd, Cobra, proudly announced they were going to tell us what the new modules were by the End of Sep for one and sometime in Oct for the other. For the first module that was only 3 weeks away. And yet here we are in Mid Jan and still no official announcement. That is some poor planning when something that is 3 weeks away gets delayed by at least 3 1/2 months (almost UT Demo territory) and I say at least because it doesn't look good that we will be getting any modules or official announcements anytime soon.

"Backer Rewards is an item we've been silent on for a while simply because we're struggling with the logistics involved, and also the amount of work to design, order and ship any items.
That said, we're ready with our Boxed copies, and hopefully will be completely ready with the replacement rewards very soon.
I promise to make this a priority in the upcoming few weeks, so expect to hear from us if you're eligible for one of these rewards."

This was posted on Sep 2nd. Last word on them was they are changing or might be changing the rewards, but no real estimate on when they will be arriving.

I'm confused, are you predicting that LNS won't release anything? Or that it will be later than expected?

The MiG-21 did not have a smooth transition to the alpha release of NTTR. VEAO also noted that the released DCS2.0 alpha was more than a bit different from their internal development build of 2.0. It would make sense that if the MiG-21 had bugs to squash, then their other pending releases probably did as well (not to mention the maps and AI). This would probably add a bunch of work and time.

I remember their September update, but they did say hope to announce.

If you've lost all confidence in LNS, why spend the time watching their updates? Why not just move on and have a look at things if they do announce or release? Otherwise, you're just torturing yourself by reading about cool things and assuming it won't happen (is this a "50 Shades of Grey style torture"?).

-Nick

I think they will release one module, maybe even two.

I know they said hope, but even with that word, their first hoped announcement was only 3 weeks away and yet here we are 5ish months later and nothing in sight.

How much would surprise you? I know I wouldn't be. It would just make sense that day that they didn't show anything and moved so slow with Mig21 because they had nothing. Like in poker.

Makes sense. So you believe them and the update, but expect that it will take longer than projected. Certainly there is a precedence for "longer than expected" in DCS.



By nothing do you mean the MiG-21 module that I fly everyday? Seems like something to me...

I would be very surprised if nothing was released, meaning that Leatherneck disintegrates without releasing any new products. Seems pretty extreme to me.

-Nick

Of course not... In the same sentence I was speaking also about the Mig. I was pointing at everything but the Mig about which I said the bug fixing went slow.

Maybe you would be surprised but if such unexpected thing would happen... you would start connecting the dots isn't it?

I know Cobra would say is conspiracy theory but I've seen projects that looked solid and on track just to be canceled abruptly. To paraphrase... because everything is subject to change...

The only way anything gets cancelled is if 5-6/9 team members get abruptly struck by and squished by a truck. Considering we're spread all across Europe and the U.S -- that is unlikely to happen.

This is my career. I have spent my prime years crunching through long nights to help build the foundation for this company. Any sort of doomsday theory is about as far fetched as you can get.

Actually Zaelu, on MiG-21 fixes is probably the best explanation why Mustang can't have his timely announcement.

Given what was written in the New Years update, Leatherneck has decided that adding a large number of "promised" features after release seriously bogs down development and prevents them from being productive. They've mentioned "mistakes" with the launch of the MiG-21, including the intent to add or fix features such as canopy icing (very tough, apparently requires some new tech), flood lights (big performance hit), new sound, etc.

I suspect that the announcements are intended to give a complete overview of their upcoming modules, which means discussing all included features. Until such features are definitely working and complete, they probably won't plan to announce them. Hence we have to wait till their products are well-sorted and all new tech is working before we hear about them. It's a smart move, so that they don't spend a huge amount of time trying to solve a problem with a feature that no other DCS developer is offering.

-Nick

The community would be better off if they realize from the outset that 2/3rd (or more) of these projects won't come to fruition. I was involved in a mod for FarCry (I was an original beta tester) that got Crytek's attention and we were the first mod team to be an official mod for FC2. We were given all the tools for the engine but as what often happens these things are being done by people who have day jobs. Our mod ended up not being completed but you can Google it. We had some great write ups in several PC mags (yeah, FarCry was that long ago) and online as well. We were even featured on the news for one of the cable channels that covers gaming (don't recall what the show was called, it's still on and it's quite popular).

Often times there just isn't enough time for the dev teams like ED to give the support to third party teams. Or at least the support they need. That's evident in how incomplete the Hawk is. Not slagging ED or anyone else that's just how things are. I was involved with the A-10A model that SIMMOD released for the community. It was an incredible amount of work for everyone. I used to have a time sheet I kept for how many hours I had in doing the skins. Hundreds of hours. While we didn't have nearly as much to do as some of these third party crews it was still pretty damn difficult. It's a miracle we got it released.

Just my opinion, from someone who's actually been there/done that.

Been saying the same for years........time and resource was never there...........after 30 years there was an F-16C and A-10C HF combat sim (1 in constant development)...............yet all of a sudden fully developed modules of A-10C fidelity were going to be dropping out of the sky from tiny dev teams....just never seemed realistic.

I still say they should release all as a lower FC standard and select a chosen few to do as a Hi Fi standard......take the pressure off get some modules out and develop other parts. More content like campaigns most welcome.

I suggest you read the story "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" because it is particularly relevant.





The Jedi Master

So then what you are saying is that no one should believe anything that Cobra says anymore because he has made a multitude of statements that have turned out not to be true.

Frankly that is quite surprising coming from you.

Ouch! It'd be great if when Cobra and the gang are ready to fire up the PR machine the first exclusive landed on the front page of simhq.

We are not a hobbyist mod team.
We are a business, with an office, with full-time employees.

This discussion has totally gone off the rails.

well, myself and the rest of the BSS are eagerly anticipating the Corsair

I was speaking in generalizations. Go back and read my first sentence.

It's funny you should say that. I was just reading the latest excuses.... erm... "update" from VEAO and wondering why they are still coming out with the same old tosh whilst the Hawk remains - imo - of a worse standard than the FC aircraft after all this time.

Speaking of MiG-21 development, any plans for a recce pod? MiG-21R?

Keep up the good work. She's fun to fly.

-Jeff

That is very clear every time I fly the MiG-21, it is outstanding work.

I don't think anyone was referring to Leatherneck with that statement. I think he was reminding everyone of the huge amount of work that goes into all of the these high-fidelity DCS modules. It is not for the faint of heart...and probably not for the part-timer.

-Nick

They were pretty much my comments going back about 5 years or so.......not based on any Crystal ball..........just seeing most who tried in combat sims to fail or leave.............and taking into account development time for such challenges.

Leatherneck get the utmost respect for taking on this challenge, because to me it doesn't look like a viable business catering for this niche........although I hope they can prove me wrong.

I am actually surprised that any modules have appeared in that time. Teams made promises......maybe they thought it was doable when they start then someone leaves, things changes in the core coding.......its highly likely a lot of the "excuses" as you say were genuinely out of their control.

The MiG-21 module is a great piece of work but it was clearly not simple getting there........the effort and problems along the way seemed immense.

The sky is blue.


Count how many times they have made statements like that. The sky is blue. Five? Six? A dozen? Two dozen?

Now count how many times you've whined and moaned about their statements. The sky is blue. I'll come back later when you've finished it because I don't have enough hours in the day to do it, but if you come back with a number under triple digits, I'll know you're either lying or too lazy to do it. The sky is blue.

If you think you can say something that often and it's fine, but they say it 5 or 6 and it's not, because they're "a company" and you're just "a customer", well you're wrong. The sky is blue. It's not. The sky is blue. The rules apply equally. The sky is blue.

What you say is irrelevant when you say it all the time, whether it's true or not. The sky is blue.

See? The sky is blue.




The Jedi Master

WTF are you even talking about now.

Agree with it, or not... it appears his point was:

"What you say is irrelevant when you say it all the time, whether it's true or not."

Like when ATC repeats to a pilot that he should change course and altitude to avoid collision with other aircraft... the more ATC repeats it the more irrelevant it becomes... lol

Well... if ATC repeats it long enough, one way or another the information will become irrelevant.

Exactly. If you've said it a dozen times, what exactly do you expect will happen when you say it 100 times?

Isn't there some adage about insanity defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?

I also laugh at the idea that these people think they are doing some great public service by pointing it out again and again to people who don't care, already know, or already know and don't care. Certainly everyone here falls into one of those three categories, so what's the point?




The Jedi Master

Sounds like it was ignored the first time but here you can't ignore the 100th. Perhaps the squeaky wheel does get the grease?

No. It wasn't ignored.

Not getting your way =! ignored.



The Jedi Master

And yet, when the MiG-21Bis was first introduced, it had unrealistic nose wheel steering. Comments from the community got that changed. When the MiG-21Bis had unrealistic engine behavior making it impossible to overspeed, outcry from the community got that changed. So yes, it's a case of, if you complain enough, something may change.

And let's be clear, LN aren't angels here. They've been leading the community on and on, and on... and on... and on. So yeah, a little complaining is catharsis, and should be taken in stride.

Those are good examples of an attentive DCS community facilitating solid improvements to a DCS module....but it's also entirely out of context in this situation. You are describing a situation in which complaints from the community leads to corrections/improvements in a product that customers paid for and was in use by the customers.

The complaints spelled out in the thread are from past or aspiring customers complaining that they have not been given any details about a product that is not for sale and has not been paid for or pre-purchased. Is there any industry where companies are required to discuss future products before they are ready for sale? Especially when the company has explicitly said that the product is not ready and they want to give an accurate account of the future features/timeline. Saying the product is not ready is a totally reasonable explanation for not talking about it.

I agree that it would have been better if there were no potential dates mentioned, but if Leatherneck hadn't mentioned a single thing about their future product people would still be outraged by the total lack of information.

Leatherneck is in this situation because people are really excited about their products and can't stop thinking about it. If people were genuinely turned off and decided to not become a future LNS customer, they wouldn't bother talking about it. When people move on and don't care, they don't talk about it.

It's hard to wait for things that could be awesome, but there is no alternative....

Plus, it's the case with ED and every other 3rd party, DCS users are well-practiced at the waiting game. Plus, the wait is almost over...probably.

-Nick

I'm amazed at some of the choices these dev teams are making. Doesn't it make sense to recreate one that will sell the most copies? Tomcat, I get that. Viggen? Doubtful anyone in my squadron will waste their time with it. Kinda like ED choosing the Black Shark. A chopper that doesn't even really exist in real squadrons. What's next, Comanche? The point is that if ED is looking to enlarge their audience a Hawk or some other trainer really isn't the best choice. That is if you intend to make money.

ED isn't doing the Hawk.
Looking at the Viggen thread over at the other site it seems to gather some interest.
What airframes should they go for, in your opinion (be it ED or 3P)?

Obscurity is in the eye of the beholder. Aren't there only about 100 A-10C's? Seems pretty obscure to me.

Though in the case of the Black Shark, I'm guessing it's simply a practical matter. Isn't the Ka-50 the only single-crew attack helicopter? I think it was a work around for the multi-crew problem.

-Nick

You recreate an aircraft as best you can and craft an enjoyable experience. Quality leads to sales.
Whether the aircraft is a niche or not.



Just like the thousands who "weren't interested in the MiG-21" prior to release who ended up loving it and it becoming their favourite DCS Module. We're seeing lots of interest from all over the community; we will deliver an excellent product, and I have no doubt it will be successful.

Regardless, if you think our products are a waste of time, I'm not sure why you're posting in this thread.



Who exactly told you ED chooses aircraft or theatres for independent, 3rd party companies?

I am always the odd ball. Other people are screaming for the F-16C, F/A-18E, F-22, and F-35. But what I want is the F-4E and MiG-21bis. Until DCS MiG-21bis was announced as a crowdfunding project, the only sim that even came close to making me happy with jets was the SFP1/WoX/SF2 series. I was constantly flying variants of the F-4, MiG-21, and MiG-23, as well as the Century series of American fighters. It just so happened, just as Third Wire announced it was possibly going to make the "sim lite" even "liter" or even switch over to tablet games, the DCS MiG-21bis announcement arrived an lifted my hopes of finally getting a decent hard-core study sim of the F-4 and MiG-21.

Despite a long and rocky development period and less than accurate announcements, the MiG-21bis turned out to be almost perfect, for a beta release.

The Draken, Viggen, and Gripen are all fantastic aircraft and rarely modeled at all in sims, much less to a study sim level. I would gladly buy them all. While I would be even more excited about the JA-37, the AJS-37 will almost be just as much fun.

I may not care much for LNS marketing/announcements techniques, but I sure do look forward to the final results... whenever they finally become available. The F4U-1D and F-14A are just as exciting to me as the AJS-37. I will hate waiting for them to be made available for download.

Technically you are correct, they don't choose them BUT they can deny them the license to produce it and while that may not be choosing which aircraft to develop, they do have the final say on what gets produced.

Mig21 is an iconic plane. People that hate it or despise it were well aware of its iconic value and although complaining about it not being the F18 or Su37 they were hoping they slowly fell in love with the 21 or at least fell for it enough to buy it. For Viggen... it might be the same due to the quality or LNS might hit a bump. It is possible that Corsair to drag the sales on Viggen if they will have similar great (if) quality.

But imho, Viggen will not have the same impact as the 21 if they will be on equal quality. Maybe if it will be better quality wise... maybe.

P.S.

I can still move my Mig21bis sideways at 6Km/h withot using brakes... just the rudder pedals.

For the Russian market it makes a lot of sense, the Ka-50 was/is the Russian equivalent of Airwolf. Quite an iconic aircraft, just not in the Western world, and I dare say the same is true of others.

Ka-50? A-10C? Military contracts that become free profits when turned around to become consumer grade products.

Very well said - my thinking from the start.

I was aghast at the 26 page (when I last looked) forum thread at LOF thoroughly pounding ED because they (a Russian dev team) had dared to make a Russian aircraft and not an American one. It was embarassing.

Haven't been back to LOF since and don't intend to.

DCS has opened a whole new world of simming for me. Do tell, where else would I have discovred that performing a realistic engine start on a Mig15 is pure joy? Where else would I have realized how enjoyable it was to dive into the cockpit of a Mig21, with all functioning switches and gadgets? I don't even have any books on early Russian post-war jet technology.... Now because of DCS, I have to take a trip to every book store I can find to add to my vast library of military reading material.

I would hope that DCS was purely about 1950's jet technology. Period. Bring em all. Every F model, every Mig model up to the Mig 27, I'll even go as far as the "modern" F4.

So sick of modern jets they don't even interest me anymore, with their fly by wire, can't crash, all too easy to fly technology. I want roaring, screaming, unstable flying, shiny cones of aluminum.

Do you mean exactly what you are doing now.

IRONY thy name is JediMaster

I'd be enjoying that one a lot more if they could go ahead and make it realistic, for good and bad. The MiG-15 was notorious for entering unrecoverable spins if it stalled, but after spending who knows how many hours (I used to fly it a lot, until I realized BST had done what they always do and moved on to their next Beta) I've not once encountered an even awkwardly bad spin, most have been so gentle I the plane would fix the problem itself if I just let go completely (that's one for "planes that can't crash"). So it seems that BST have moved into some quite blatant national bias apart from just shoddy work.

So you disagreed with what was being said and you left? Good for you. If you're that sensitive to free thinking discussion you definitely don't belong at LOF. Head over to ED's forums where you will toe the party line or you will be removed. It's much safer for you over there.

You LOF guys sure come off as rather aggressive at times.

I opted out of any discussion on any subject relating to the developer of DCS and any 3rd party developer - but since our website has been mentioned, I will make this one exception.


for those that don't know , Rugg is a moderator at LockOnFiles.

While some of us have been aggressive at times, so have been those connected with the developer, so we are even.

As for our website - you would have to dig deep in our forums, back 4 or 5 years to find posts that are in any way critical in a disrespectful way.

Ours is not a discussion forum like here, still, like Rugg said, it is one that allows free discussion and we keep that very civil, as anyone browsing our website can attest.

As for posts here at SimHQ - as a rule now, I try to skip any posts made by people connected with the developer.

I suggest doing this as an effective way not to get irritated by posts one finds objectionable, just look at who posted and skip it, very easy to do.

I didn't want to be associated with people openly displaying such single-minded arrogance.

Simple.

By the way, my mods were downloaded several thousand times at LOF, but you're right - I should upload them elsewhere, and I have done since.

Ah yes - and it's not okay for them to have the freedom to produce whichever product they like, but is okay for you to complain about it?

Pot kettle and black.

EDIT: Actually, you are right in that people have the right to complain. My mistake. This wasn't simply complaining, though, it was more of a malicious witch-hunt. If you condone such behaviour then it doesn't surprise me if you are banned from a forum.

Lets get back to LNS please.

So... is there any of the fixes of the bugs reported on bugtracker fixed in the latest patch? Cause I had to use the emergency brake again after a quick take off and landing as no drag chute deployed.

Also.

Is it realistic that Mig21 can be steered without using brake lever at only 6km/h? Is the aerodynamic pressure on elevator big enough at this speed? (I am a bit sarcastic, ok )

The only reason the chute wouldn't deploy (bug-wise) is the pneumatic pressure depleted which was a bug but I thought was fixed (open alpha?). Otherwise is super easy to accidentally deploy the 'chute in flight and you'll never know it's unavailable.

I apologize if I hurt your feelings. Seriously. All I meant was that at least there was discussion over at LOF. You are not allowed to discuss anything on ED's forums if it's negative for ED. The post is removed and often times you get banned.

If it was me, I'd rather hear what everyone has to say, even if I don't agree with it. That's how adults used to deal with dissention.

Well I have to say, I've been gobsmacked at the slating they have been getting recently on the DCS forums, as well as the 3rd party devs (some you could say had brought it on themselves, but that would be a controverasial opinion, I'm sure) but although I've been a member there for many years, I've not seen the kind of aggressive 'policing' that was prevalent a couple of years ago for some time now.

I think that some of the overly assertive mods have disappeared and it seems the rest have either been reined-in or had a rethink.

As always, I think it's not what people have to say, but the way they say it - many of my posts are seen as far more aggressive or 'angry' than they are ever meant to be - that's the thing about reading over hearing/seeing.

Hi,

Just wanted to say I just picked up the DCS: MiG-21bis by Leatherneck Simulations (order 310048) from eagle

I purchased this mod after listening to the awesome pod cast 476th Podcast - Episode 5


I am motivated to buy this mod because of the close passionate team that put this mod together and the pursuit of perfection and that the mod will help me understand the mig 21.


In short I know I am getting a really great quality mod here with this and the people making it are going above and beyond to make sure I get a good experience and the aircraft is pretty darn accurate with on going close updates and care, this goes a long way.

From the 476 last pod cast they reported a lot of stuff for this year so hopefully they can report in how the mod community is coming along, topics like VR and how EDGE map making is shaping up.


Ill be getting back in the A10c to continue my learning on that airframe but very interested in the quality of works on the mig so will be firing it up to take a look around the cockpit.

thanks leatherneck for making some thing really good with strong focus on quality pretty sure a lot of people think the same way I do,

welcome to message me when the f15 is available.

thanks.

I think the Migbus is my favorite DCS module but I have to complain about the significant avionics mis-modelings. I really like the fact that you can't abuse the electronics and it has a very organic feel to many of the systems. It's blind praise that causes me to raise my finger with exceptions in direct proportionality. I rubber band to "it's good but has faults" quite strongly.

The weapon selection switches are quite wrong, the ARK is way off, the SPO lacks very useful subtlety, the RSBN stopped well short of in-depth and quite useful functionality, the PRMG glidescope is for the space shuttle, the radio navaids are not based on the ones present in the terrain, the sight has major errors, the audio missile feedback is simplistic, the SORC light isn't correct, blah blah blah.

I'm glad they're fixing some of it but it's slow both naturally because creating a detailed simulation takes a long time and also because the effort is diluted with other projects. I try not to think about how much has passed between buying the thing and having a reasonable enjoyable time completing the included campaign (ugh, GCI-less 60s interceptor against DCS AI killbots.)

That's some really interesting feedback Frederf, it sounds like you really know what you are talking about.

What is your aviation or simulation back ground? How do you compare from other simulators or real world usage?

One of the dreams I have about DCS is that some bold projects like the SR71, F117, and unusual assets can come to DCS,

At the moment it looks like I have my hands full with A10c for next months,

I think it is not to be under estimated just how many extra people are going to start buying into DCS because of VR.


You know just sitting here thinking.
If I was Eagle, or the mod makers,

I would make stand alone experiences like The Apollo 11 Experience,



There are going to be many hundreds of thousands of new people joining into demanding VR experiences like star citizen, assetto corsa.


An online VR school for flight training, I guess its already in the game but helping people to reach stepping stones to make it manageable to fly these craft, its not easy, and it shouldn't be easy, its real life flying buy by computer.


Leather neck if you come to these forums do you have any input about those points mentioned, also when are your next asset available as I want to send you more money..


thanks
bud

I think most the issues that the community have identified come from people with access to the real world mig-21 manual and maybe some people who have experience of some sort on the real deal aircraft. Leatherneck has a real world pilot who also codes on their team, so they have a pretty solid reference. This is what makes their decision to add things like CCiP bombing and a pipper that fallows IR locked targets to the ASP all the more puzzling. Seems like more trouble then it's worth to add these things if the real A/c doesn't do it.

I have a lot of time in light civilian aircraft and even a couple hours in an L-39. I tend to judge sims/moduals on the believability of the flight model, if it doesn't convince me that I'm accually fling that aircraft il have a hard time trying to learn its systems. That being said I love flying the mig. I'm not a big "avionics geek" and havnt read much of the real manual to validate the criticisms of the outspoken few of the community. However, leatherneck have said they are addressing some of the issues that have been brought up, its just been taking awhile, like ED they are very busy. They even have a bug tracker to keep us up to date on what's being fixed. https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.com/

I agree with you that the team seems passionate about the products they develop. The Mig is a high quality addon well worth the price dispite the issues IMHO. There is really no comparison to it in other sims. It's an obscure aircraft witch you will not find a better representation of anywhere.

It's amazing how no matter the project's obscurity someone will come out of nowhere with incredible levels of familiarity. It could be a 1918 triplane and someone will say "yeah, I used to work on those."

Frederf you can add to your list the slightly broken radar from last patch the surreal but rewarding overpowered missiles the fixed/broken/partially fixed air leak from one of the circuits, the still existent ability to turn at slow speeds without using brakes. And maybe... the hugely delayed paint schemes kit that finely came out but in 2GB size and little usability (no presets within, for example I was expecting a Romanian "fictitious" skin at least in the kit, necessity to combine some files to obtain some useful texture...)

The Mig is awesome as it is, that is a fact, but the small issues it has old, new or recurring dents its aura and also place a shadow on the future projects. Sure... it could be the case they are stretched over big work but...

**yawn

..you have to.. you have to be kidding now, right?
Gold jerry, gold

How about we just build you a "Make a Paintscheme application" where you press a button and it magically spits out new liveries. :P

No need, Cobra. Those new templates are good enough.

I think we would agree it would be useful in the long run. This and ability to switch paintschemes in briefing like in IL-2 would give a new dimension to painting those planes.

Sorry if I offended you Cobra... chill... enjoy your drink. I think I used some paintkit for... I don't remember... Ka-50? Su-27? Something and had layers with decals and also different camos from which one could more easily start mixing something. This and the fact that at some point your or maybe Rudel said that in the long awaited skins (last year or maybe 2014) a Romanian paint scheme will also be available... made me think... erroneously I can understand now that since that skin never materialized it would be hidden in some layers in that huge paint kit.

Thing is that the expanding number of DCS players and DCS Mig21 owners are at most in same proportions as the old ones "artists" in creating skins. So I think (wrong maybe) that making such thing easier rather than more difficult would actually help making the 21 even more enjoyable. Now if this would be easier for the average player I could also profit from it as I have less and less time to burn on this.

I was sent into that conclusion about the paintkit also because of these two posts:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2731067#post2731067

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2731047#post2731047

oh... and this

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2731820#post2731820


imho... clearly more complicated than before.

If you say this is how it should be... OK. No need to argue with you about it.

But since we are at this here is a screenshot for you. I post it as a link as I don't want to clutter the page.

http://i.imgur.com/CEzrj7c.jpg

I really don't know why is this happening (still) in few minutes. Could be the brake axis leaking continuously too fast? Anyway... The cockpit is top notch!

I'm not offended. It was just an unexpected (and weird!) critiscism.
The paintkit is for power users and (mostly) for people more experienced with Photoshop.

The issue is that you really can't make the paintkit easier to use.
At least, not non-destructively.

You can't collapse some layers in Photoshop without destructive effects on their blending modes.

Additionally, the source textures are split into parts because working with a single, 8K texture, with hundreds of layers in Photoshop would bring even a system with 64GB of RAM to a crawl. (Even as it stands, you'll need 16-32GB of RAM to use it at all)

There is nothing difficult about combining them as in the post I linked above. It's literally just placing each texture next to eachother on an 8K texture. Takes 20 seconds, even for someone with 0 Photoshop skills.

I'll wait for them to do some nice skins then. No problem.

when one quotes, one can see what is #%&*$# .

I said this once, I say it again : I don't know where you guys find such a reservoir of anger and resentment.

I think they probably find it on SimHQ forums....

But did the skates have the proper number of rivets?

Where exactly is the download link? I can't seem to find it on the LN website?