DCS: Bf-109K-4 'Kurfurst' pre-order

[SOLIDKREATE]

DCS: Bf-109K-4 'Kurfurst' pre-order

 

Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/kurfurst/

 

 

Sure can't wait until November!

[ST_ami7b5]

I'll wait for Normandy/EDGE map.

Nowhere to fly my DCS:Mustang&Dora ATM....

[Brano]

Only historical event where these LW planes appeared in more or less significant numbers was operation Bodenplatte (1.1.1945).And for that we need completly different map,not Normandy.Normandy is more of ''what if LW could get kurfurst and dora in significant numbers 4 months earlier'' scenario.I just wonder why they have chosen it.I am not big fan of ''What if''.

2nd historical possibility would be Reichsverteidigung campaign from like October44 to spring 1945.Again,different map would be required (maybe Ruhrgebiet area as example) but modeling such high density industrial landscape would take at least 2 years of development,if not more.And of course some 4 engine bombers on allied side.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Lack of "proper" maps has not stopped the community before and I am sure it won't do that now either.

Edited August 31, 2014 by LLv34_Flanker

[Finkeren]

Only historical event where these LW planes appeared in more or less significant numbers was operation Bodenplatte (1.1.1945).And for that we need completly different map,not Normandy.Normandy is more of ''what if LW could get kurfurst and dora in significant numbers 4 months earlier'' scenario.I just wonder why they have chosen it.I am not big fan of ''What if''.

2nd historical possibility would be Reichsverteidigung campaign from like October44 to spring 1945.Again,different map would be required (maybe Ruhrgebiet area as example) but modeling such high density industrial landscape would take at least 2 years of development,if not more.And of course some 4 engine bombers on allied side.

 

Well an Ardennes (winter) map would have been more fitting, to be sure. I don't think it'll completely ruin the experience, but it is sort of an odd choice for this planeset.

 

Kinda gives you the idea (perhaps unjustified) that the dev team was working in different directions at a critical point in the development process. Some with a raging hard on for the really late war planes and others wanting to recreate the intensity of the Normandy Campaign. 

Edited August 31, 2014 by Finkeren

[Feathered_IV]

I don't think I'll buy it any time soon. I'm looking for more of a unit-level simulation than a purely mechanical one.

[ST_ami7b5]

Only historical event where these LW planes appeared in more or less significant numbers was operation Bodenplatte (1.1.1945).And for that we need completly different map,not Normandy.Normandy is more of ''what if LW could get kurfurst and dora in significant numbers 4 months earlier'' scenario.I just wonder why they have chosen it.I am not big fan of ''What if''.

2nd historical possibility would be Reichsverteidigung campaign from like October44 to spring 1945.Again,different map would be required (maybe Ruhrgebiet area as example) but modeling such high density industrial landscape would take at least 2 years of development,if not more.And of course some 4 engine bombers on allied side.

I agree, but Normandy map (which is being worked at already IRC) would still be 100x better than the current 'modern' Georgia map, wchich is a huge immersion killer for me when flying Mustang/Dora...

Edited August 31, 2014 by ST_ami7b5

[MiloMorai]

There are late '44 German a/c to give the early '44 P-51 some competition.

[Finkeren]

There are late '44 German a/c to give the early '44 P-51 some competition.

 

Imagine the outcry, if BoS had modeled the La-5FN and Yak-3 to fight over Stalingrad to "give the Bf109s some competition".

[saf]

Got the stang as it vent beta and got the D9 as well.  Will stop here and wait and se if ED do have any  interest in the historical part (72-75MP boost for the stang) if they do have an interest in the historical part Im possitive to buy the K4.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Keep in mind allies will still get late P-47 and Spitfire models to keep the competition up. Only the 262 (which I'm very interested in) might stand out by far, but with a fair amount of flaws to make up for it's exclusivenes.

 

There's no need to moan about disbalance with every german plane added, even more in a radical realistic sim like DCS. I 'm thinking about preordering the K-4 simply because I've aways had an inner love with Messerschmitts most famous design and it's capeabilities, though I'm not totally convinced by DCS yet.

[Finkeren]

Keep in mind allies will still get late P-47 and Spitfire models to keep the competition up. Only the 262 (which I'm very interested in) might stand out by far, but with a fair amount of flaws to make up for it's exclusivenes.

 

 

 

The P-47D-30 might have been the definitive version of the "D" Thunderbolts, but they were by no means the most modern P-47s in early 1945. The Spit in DCS is going to be Mk. IX, a two year old design for 1945.

 

There's no need to moan about disbalance with every german plane added, even more in a radical realistic sim like DCS. I 'm thinking about preordering the K-4 simply because I've aways had an inner love with Messerschmitts most famous design and it's capeabilities, though I'm not totally convinced by DCS yet.

 

 

I couldn't care less about "balance". That was Milo Morai who brought that up. I'm talking about having extremely late war German aircraft flying on a Normandy map. It makes no sense.

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

Only historical event where these LW planes appeared in more or less significant numbers was operation Bodenplatte (1.1.1945).And for that we need completly different map,not Normandy.Normandy is more of ''what if LW could get kurfurst and dora in significant numbers 4 months earlier'' scenario.I just wonder why they have chosen it.I am not big fan of ''What if''.

2nd historical possibility would be Reichsverteidigung campaign from like October44 to spring 1945.Again,different map would be required (maybe Ruhrgebiet area as example) but modeling such high density industrial landscape would take at least 2 years of development,if not more.And of course some 4 engine bombers on allied side.

Agreed 100%

 

The current and proposed mix of aircraft for the DCS WWII product is not representative of WWII itself. Clearly DCS is choosing to produce the planes based on cool factor over planes that actually saw the bulk of service during the war. Which mean server (mission makers) wont be able to re-create the bulk of WWII air battles, which means the bulk of servers will consist of fast action air start air quake types of servers, where the enemy base will be so close to yours that you can see them taking off from their base from your base, and that you will probably be getting shot at before you even get your wheels up.

 

For example, the current choice of making the Bf109K-4. In 1944 the Germans produced ~12,800 Bf109s, of those only ~854 were K-4s, which is only 7% (6.7%) of the Bf109s build during 1944. Therefore the chances of an allied pilot encountering a K-4 was very low, read the K-4 was the exception to the rule as far as 109s go in 1944. So you have to wonder why DCS choose to make this version? Same argument applies to the Dora they recently release in beta

[Finkeren]

Clearly DCS is choosing to produce the planes based on cool factor over planes that actually saw the bulk of service during the war. Which mean server (mission makers) wont be able to re-create the bulk of WWII air battles, which means the bulk of servers will consist of fast action air start air quake types of servers.

While I agree with the general point of your post, I think this chain of events is far from given. Mission makers and modders have always displayed great talent when it comes to making the most from a limited choice of planes and maps.

 

I think the greatest problem for DCS WW2 in both MP and campaigns isn't going to be the choice of time frame, but rather the narrow focus on fighters. Without bombers and even without an effective fighter-bomber for the Germans, how are mission builders going to create varied scenarios that offer players a choice of playing different roles on their team?

[csThor]

DCS is a study sim first and foremost. And ... well, in my opinion at least, a "procedure sim" which mainly derives its fascination (for those who seek that) from managing various systems of an aircraft within a combat sortie. Which is also why it's not my cup of tea as I simply can't separate aircraft from their historical environments.

[Johnny_Red]

I'm talking about having extremely late war German aircraft flying on a Normandy map. It makes no sense.

 

 

Agreed 100%

 

The current and proposed mix of aircraft for the DCS WWII product is not representative of WWII itself. Clearly DCS is choosing to produce the planes based on cool factor over planes that actually saw the bulk of service during the war. Which mean server (mission makers) wont be able to re-create the bulk of WWII air battles, which means the bulk of servers will consist of fast action air start air quake types of servers, where the enemy base will be so close to yours that you can see them taking off from their base from your base, and that you will probably be getting shot at before you even get your wheels up.

 

For example, the current choice of making the Bf109K-4. In 1944 the Germans produced ~12,800 Bf109s, of those only ~854 were K-4s, which is only 7% (6.7%) of the Bf109s build during 1944. Therefore the chances of an allied pilot encountering a K-4 was very low, read the K-4 was the exception to the rule as far as 109s go in 1944. So you have to wonder why DCS choose to make this version? Same argument applies to the Dora they recently release in beta

Kind of like having a FW190 fighting in the battle of Stalingrad

[Finkeren]

Kind of like having a FW190 fighting in the battle of Stalingrad

Touché! But at least the Fw 190 A3 actually existed at the time of the Battle of Stalingrad.

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

While I agree with the general point of your post, I think this chain of events is far from given.

Well nothing is set in stone, hopefully DCS will listen to some of the feedback and make the appropriate changes.

 

Mission makers and modders have always displayed great talent when it comes to making the most from a limited choice of planes and maps.

True, but how many flight sims can you name that only have one map?

 

I think the greatest problem for DCS WW2 in both MP and campaigns isn't going to be the choice of time frame, but rather the narrow focus on fighters.

Agreed 100%

 

Without bombers and even without an effective fighter-bomber for the Germans, how are mission builders going to create varied scenarios that offer players a choice of playing different roles on their team?

Bingo! My point exactly

[DD_bongodriver]

ED are making more maps, VEAO are making more maps, other 3rd party developers are welcome to make more maps, 3rd party developers are making other aircraft........give it time.

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

DCS is a study sim first and foremost.

Agreed 100%

DCS is a good survey (study sim) that is a lot of fun to play! Only that in it's current and proposed form it will not make for a good WWII combat flight simulator.

 

And ... well, in my opinion at least, a "procedure sim" which mainly derives its fascination (for those who seek that) from managing various systems of an aircraft within a combat sortie.

That is where DCS stuff shines! I love the start up procedures, but again, that has historically been done in the Microsoft Flight Simulators types of flight sims, where the focus is on talking to the tower for taxi, navigating from one air field to another, and NO focus on air combat. Historically air combat simulators focus on air combat, and all those procedural things are lower on the list of important things to do, much lower on the list than say 'good net code'. I know someday the two will be one, but until that day comes, I personally think DCS should move the net code issue up on the list if they are planning on making a WWII air combat simulator and not just a WWII take of and landing procedural flight simulator

 

Which is also why it's not my cup of tea as I simply can't separate aircraft from their historical environments.

I am a lot like you!

 

But, at the same time I can enjoy DCS for what it is! It is a lot of fun, but, it is no WWII air combat simulator

ED are making more maps, VEAO are making more maps, other 3rd party developers are welcome to make more maps, 3rd party developers are making other aircraft........give it time.

There is hope!

 

I think DCS making the move to WWII has brought it some attention that it just did not have when it was souly a BVR modern jet sim..

 

For example, for the past 10+ years DCS has been a BVR modern jets sim with ONE MAP, ever since the realize of the P51, a lot more activity has been going on over at DCS, which is good for all of us! But, even if they add 100 WWII planes and 100 MAPS in the next six months, if they don't fix the net code, it will still not be a viable WWII dog fight simulator IMHO

[DD_bongodriver]

 

 

it is no WWII air combat simulator

 

it is a highly accurate study simulator that will eventually feature some WWII types, in time it should feature some relevant maps and compliment those with relevant aircraft, presumably that means people will be able to conduct air combat in WWII aircraft over WWII maps at some point.

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

Agreed, in that you said what I am saying.. Only thing you left out was my point of the 10+ year old broken net code.. Poor net code can work in a BVR modern flight sim, but not an up close in your face gun fight flight sim

[DD_bongodriver]

 

 

if they don't fix the net code, it will still not be a viable WWII dog fight simulator IMHO

 

Maybe that is what Luthier has been retasked for.......apparently it's where he excels.

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

Fingers Crossed!

 

Because if they fix that 10 y/o problem, I can look past a lot of the other short commings

[LukeFF]

ED are making more maps, VEAO are making more maps, other 3rd party developers are welcome to make more maps, 3rd party developers are making other aircraft........give it time.

 

And all of those maps have been in development for years. Nevada, anyone? 

[Leaf]

Maybe that is what Luthier has been retasked for.......apparently it's where he excels.

 

Out of interest, who is Luthier? I've heard his name thrown about in CloD and DCS discussions. I also heard some of the people from CloD are now working on DCS, what's the history behind that? 

If the discussion gets too volatile, please PM me, I don't want this to get locked.

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

And all of those maps have been in development for years. Nevada, anyone? 

That's right! I remember something about a Nevada map years ago! Just couldn't put my finger on it, but basically I knew that DCS has a tendency to over promise some things.. But, I will have to admit, they seem to have some new motivation over there, ever since the release of the P51, they seem to be doing more and doing it faster, so who knows, maybe that 10 yo broken net code will get fixed?

[Feathered_IV]

Out of interest, who is Luthier? I've heard his name thrown about in CloD and DCS discussions. I also heard some of the people from CloD are now working on DCS, what's the history behind that?

If the discussion gets too volatile, please PM me, I don't want this to get locked.

Luthier was the project leader of the Pacific Fighters addon for the original Il-2 series, before Oleg Maddox stepped in to direct its completion. Luthier in turn stepped in to take over the completion of Cliffs of Dover after Oleg Maddox departed. Luthier stepped out as 777 stepped in to take over the new Il-2 franchise. Luthier then kicked off the DCS WW2 kickstarter, before stepping out as DCS stepped in to direct its completion.

[Emgy]

You may have heard of him by his name: Ilya Shevchenko.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Calvamos

[Charlo-VR]

Jason has posted pictures of him and Ilya together. Here are two links to those from the ROF forums:

 

http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=18481

 

http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=18290

[Leaf]

Luthier was the project leader of the Pacific Fighters addon for the original Il-2 series, before Oleg Maddox stepped in to direct its completion. Luthier in turn stepped in to take over the completion of Cliffs of Dover after Oleg Maddox departed. Luthier stepped out as 777 stepped in to take over the new Il-2 franchise. Luthier then kicked off the DCS WW2 kickstarter, before stepping out as DCS stepped in to direct its completion.

 

Thanks for the summary Feathered! What twisted turn of events...

 

 

Jason has posted pictures of him and Ilya together. Here are two links to those from the ROF forums:

 

http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=18481

 

http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=18290

 

I remember that, from all those (3) years ago! Thanks for reminding me! :D

[siipperi]

 

True, but how many flight sims can you name that only have one map?

 

 

 

 

Just from new and exciting flight sims? DCS and BOS, both looks like excellent games yet them both have only one map... 

 

 

 

I think DCS making the move to WWII has brought it some attention that it just did not have when it was souly a BVR modern jet sim..

 

For example, for the past 10+ years DCS has been a BVR modern jets sim with ONE MAP, ever since the realize of the P51, a lot more activity has been going on over at DCS, which is good for all of us! But, even if they add 100 WWII planes and 100 MAPS in the next six months, if they don't fix the net code, it will still not be a viable WWII dog fight simulator IMHO

 

Actually DCS or before that LockOn map have evolved over the years. It have seen multiple revamps and mapped area is totally different than it used to be in LockOn days.

Agreed DCS netcode is really bad but they said they revamp it after the realease of the EDGE (which was said on last year) so maybe they do it for DCS 2.0. I wouldn't be too worried with maps and modules. There are already multiple 3rd parties making WW2 aircrafts and atleast one dev team making new maps. ED is apparently working on Nevada, Normandy and atleast one non announced map project that should be released at somepoint judging recent news.

 

DCS players are willing to wait, heck I have waited for F/A 18C for over 3 years and looks like I see light at the end of the tunnel.

[SYN_Ricky]

Kind of like having a FW190 fighting in the battle of Stalingrad

 

Sure, but at least now even before release we already have a new map (even if a smaller one) depicting an area where the FW 190 was in use during that period.

[Brano]

Just from new and exciting flight sims? DCS and BOS, both looks like excellent games yet them both have only one map... 

 

 

BoS has 2 maps.

1.Stalingrad (Operation Uran)

2.Novosokolniki (for Fw190 historical appearance within JG51 north of Rzhev salient during operation Mars).This is just part of larger Velikye Luki map further in development (might be ready for official release,we will see)

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

Just from new and exciting flight sims? DCS and BOS, both looks like excellent games yet them both have only one map...

First things first, BoS has two maps, Second, DCS, much like IL2, has been around for over 10 years. That and I don't think it is fair to compare a sim that is in beta testing to a sim that has been around for 10+ years.

 

Actually DCS or before that LockOn map have evolved over the years. It have seen multiple revamps and mapped area is totally different than it used to be in LockOn days.

Totally different? Well, we will have to agree to disagree on that claim

 

Agreed DCS netcode is really bad but they said they revamp it after the realease of the EDGE (which was said on last year) so maybe they do it for DCS 2.0.

Well as some pointed out here, DCS promises a lot of things (NEVADA map) that never come true, so, Ill take the 'seeing is believing' approach to the net code getting fixed.

 

I wouldn't be too worried with maps and modules. There are already multiple 3rd parties making WW2 aircrafts and atleast one dev team making new maps.

That is good news, as I noted, there seems to be a new motivation over there, fingers crossed

 

ED is apparently working on Nevada,

Have been for some time

 

Normandy and atleast one non announced map project that should be released at somepoint judging recent news.

Believe it when I see it!

 

DCS players are willing to wait,

Agreed 100%

 

As noted, I have been waiting for 10+ for the net code to be fixed

 

heck I have waited for F/A 18C for over 3 years and looks like I see light at the end of the tunnel.

Three years.. Heck, due to my DCS net code waiting training, I can do 3 years standing on my head gargling pennant butter.