DCS news

[ZachariasX 1008]

9 minutes ago, Wulfen said:

As I said I don`t know to be honest, only the real pilots can deliver an appropriate judgement on what is the more realistic model. I agree with you on the price, I wouldn`t pay it and bought the warbirds and virtually the rest of the DCS modules at the 50% sale price or less, except for the F/A-18 & F-14. I have to say the F/A-18 is worth the price and knowing Heatblur I believe the F-14 will be worth the pre-order price. I have a problem with IL2 in relation to the price of the new collector aircraft at $20. It`s too expensive for what it delivers and in comparison to DCS modules on sale for ~$30 or less, and is way overpriced. I think $10 is a fair price for any collector plane especially on sale. I have all the IL2 stuff from BoS to TC & FC, plus all the collector planes, but I am not going to give $20 for the new one.

I bought most of the DCS modules, mostly out of the sherr curiosity about learning the aircraft. Bottom line, they entertain my curiosity to be top investments. The WW2 birds less so, as I knew the planes at least in part, so it is more just starting up and flying and then all is as it should be minus some kinks that are a bit weird in my personal taste.

 

The F-86 is great fun, simple and rewarding to learn, same the Mig-15 and surprisingly the F-5. The F-18 is fantastic, although complicated enough that I‘m still nowhere with it. I also got the F-14 as it really looks promising. My biggest worry is not having the time to really learn them. But so far, these jets are top notch.

 

But for fragging, IMHO nothing beats BoX, especially in FC flavor.

 

The collectors planes are expensive compared to the rest, but seen in how much entertainment you get for thise 20$, they are great value. You can even teach the kids (or spouse) flying on the Po2. As you can put a machine gun on it, they‘ll love it too.

 

Besides, it is a bad feeling associated to opening the BoX hangar and not having all aircraft there.

[LuseKofte 1419]

On what to compare, in my taste, PO 2 was reinventing GB series, I havent had the same feeling since I flew LAGG 3 when the game came out, to be honest I prefer P 51 in DCS before P 47 in this. I am really confused. I guess planes that make you feel the flight dynamics the most in GB series is my all time favorites. in some planes I personally do not get that. In DCS the lack of environment is something you take with the brand. Flying choppers there is quite opposite , the flight dynamics is wonderful then

[Wulfen 44]

8 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

I bought most of the DCS modules, mostly out of the sherr curiosity about learning the aircraft. Bottom line, they entertain my curiosity to be top investments. The WW2 birds less so, as I knew the planes at least in part, so it is more just starting up and flying and then all is as it should be minus some kinks that are a bit weird in my personal taste.

 

The F-86 is great fun, simple and rewarding to learn, same the Mig-15 and surprisingly the F-5. The F-18 is fantastic, although complicated enough that I‘m still nowhere with it. I also got the F-14 as it really looks promising. My biggest worry is not having the time to really learn them. But so far, these jets are top notch.

 

But for fragging, IMHO nothing beats BoX, especially in FC flavor.

 

The collectors planes are expensive compared to the rest, but seen in how much entertainment you get for thise 20$, they are great value. You can even teach the kids (or spouse) flying on the Po2. As you can put a machine gun on it, they‘ll love it too.

 

Besides, it is a bad feeling associated to opening the BoX hangar and not having all aircraft there.

Yes with you on the Sabre, and both MiG`s, especially the 21 are great fun to fly. I find the Harrier a very versatile aircraft for A2G, I have to get stuck into the A-10C. The F/A-18 I find is relativity user friendly and extremely easy to fly with the fly by wire system. Even the trainers are quiet good especially the C-101CC with it`s ordnance choices. The heli`s I picked up in the bundle which was great value, and the MI-8 really is good fun mastering the startup with the bank of buttons and switches, with the Huey used for trimming the grass. I dip into to them as I fancy, but a dynamic campaign is badly needed and seems on the way. For the depth and complexity of the systems there is good value in DCS, but the WW2 planes are best got on sale, as the depth of systems is not there or could it be on that generation aircraft. DCS actually said their best profit to work involved margin comes from the WW2 warbirds, due to their lack of complexity, just compare a project like the F/A-18 or Heatblur`s F-14 to the Spitfire or P-51, and then look at their prices. DCS are seemingly getting into WW2 in a big way due to this factor with a range of aircraft such as the P-47 & Mosquito slated for 2019, as well as a new WW2 map. DCS could develop 2 or 3 WW2 birds in comparison to completing the F/A-18 and it`s subsystems. 

I agree, for the best WW2/battlefield feel IL2 has it nailed. It doesn`t need the clicky aspect for WW2 aircraft due to the lack of modern systems. Now if IL2 ventured into the jet era such as Korea, Vietnam etc. things might change, but I doubt it. 

Edited December 28, 2018 by Wulfen

[LuseKofte 1419]

Med and KIA evac by night

Edited December 27, 2018 by LuseKofte

[Wulfen 44]

1 hour ago, LuseKofte said:

Med and KIA evac by night

Are they missions/campaign? I have all the campaigns, just haven`t done the MI-8 ones yet. Too busy messing with the mission creator myself.

Edited December 28, 2018 by Wulfen

[LuseKofte 1419]

Yes spring Tension campaign   Wonderful mix og missions

[LuseKofte 1419]

Deploying troops up in the mountains, hard mission heavy heli and high altitude make mistakes costly when attempting to land

[Monostripezebra 1015]

IT`S CHRISTMAS AGAIN!!

 

 

Edited December 28, 2018 by Monostripezebra

[Danziger 1735]

Hmm...

CE2 or F14? 

[Monostripezebra 1015]

 

Edited December 28, 2018 by Monostripezebra

[dburne 1241]

Interesting news today about the new upcoming MAC product.

Going to have 4 maps and 14 aircraft  initially, along with entirely new interface and redesigned mission generator.

Slated for 2019 release.

 

[Pudu 18]

I hope that's a general release mission editor and it spurs a flurry of user made missions.

 

It would be great if ED can find a way to update the game without breaking missions so easily. They have adopted a strange strategy of not making copious amounts of campaigns available, even though admitting the vast majority of buyers are single players. If I were a developer, I'd hire some talent to put out a new campaign at least every year for all of my modules. Personally, when I have bought modules, the main decider was the amount and quality of the campaigns available. Razam made a smart move grabbing the services of Baltic Dragon. And I own the Mirage and now the Harrier almost solely because of that fact. During the latest sale, and against my better judgement, I grabbed the Mig-15, only because the Museum Relic campaign gets so much praise.

 

I hope the Viggen and F-14 campaigns are of great quality.

Edited December 28, 2018 by Pudu

[Danziger 1735]

Has M3 said what kind of campaigns will be coming with the CE2?

[Bremspropeller 345]

A Night Witches campaign possibly? 😵

[LLv34_Flanker 787]

S!

 

Just flying the Spitfire..

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2018 by LLv34_Flanker

[Sokol1 1286]

Yak-52 "cross country".

 

 

[II./JG77_Manu* 871]

On ‎12‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 9:50 PM, dburne said:

Interesting news today about the new upcoming MAC product.

Going to have 4 maps and 14 aircraft  initially, along with entirely new interface and redesigned mission generator.

Slated for 2019 release.

 

 

what is MAC? Do you have a link?

[dburne 1241]

21 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

what is MAC? Do you have a link?

DCS Modern Air Combat.

New upcoming separate product from ED, simplified cockpits and a new single player/multiplayer environment.

Initially with 4 maps and 14 aircraft I believe. And new Mission Generator.

 

Trailer:

 

Edited January 3 by dburne

[II./JG77_Manu* 871]

21 minutes ago, dburne said:

DCS Modern Air Combat.

New upcoming separate product from ED, simplified cockpits and a new single player/multiplayer environment.

Initially with 4 maps and 14 aircraft I believe. And new Mission Generator.

 

Trailer:

 

 

Thanks for that. I just checked an article because I can't watch vids right now, it doesn't look that special there: 

https://www.polygon.com/2018/7/13/17570028/modern-air-combat-eagle-dynamics-announcement-price-release-date

 

According to the article only maps and aircraft we already have, probably sold with simplified mechanics and as a pack. I don't see what it will change in the current clutterfest of DCS. Now if they would include as 4 maps Korea, Vietnam, Gulf region and Central Europe (for a fictional hot cold war) and 14 respective aircraft that fought there, it would be a real story (comparable to new theatres for IL2 Great Battles being announced). But this Mac seems really nothing new...

[dburne 1241]

23 minutes ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

Thanks for that. I just checked an article because I can't watch vids right now, it doesn't look that special there: 

https://www.polygon.com/2018/7/13/17570028/modern-air-combat-eagle-dynamics-announcement-price-release-date

 

According to the article only maps and aircraft we already have, probably sold with simplified mechanics and as a pack. I don't see what it will change in the current clutterfest of DCS. Now if they would include as 4 maps Korea, Vietnam, Gulf region and Central Europe (for a fictional hot cold war) and 14 respective aircraft that fought there, it would be a real story (comparable to new theatres for IL2 Great Battles being announced). But this Mac seems really nothing new...

 

I think the big difference is in the more the simplified cockpits. Not quite as much to learn there, hence a much lower learning curve over the complex aircraft cockpits of DCS.

[II./JG77_Manu* 871]

13 minutes ago, dburne said:

 

I think the big difference is in the more the simplified cockpits. Not quite as much to learn there, hence a much lower learning curve over the complex aircraft cockpits of DCS.

 

I don't know to be honest. I own both FC3 aircraft and full fidelity models. I don't think it is easier to fly FC3 aircraft combat effective then full fidelity models. Well, you have to learn the start-up procedure, but in flight more often then not I find it easier to fly the full fidelity aircraft, because you don't have to remember tons of buttons you set to your Hotas (and which are different for every model / heli), but only have to remember where the buttons are in the aircraft cockpit, which is a lot easier at least with my mind (and in VR). 

[DD_Arthur 1305]

I'm looking forward to MAC very much in the fall of 2018 lol.

 

Oh well, DCS.........

[Pudu 18]

2 hours ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

I don't know to be honest. I own both FC3 aircraft and full fidelity models. I don't think it is easier to fly FC3 aircraft combat effective then full fidelity models. Well, you have to learn the start-up procedure, but in flight more often then not I find it easier to fly the full fidelity aircraft, because you don't have to remember tons of buttons you set to your Hotas (and which are different for every model / heli), but only have to remember where the buttons are in the aircraft cockpit, which is a lot easier at least with my mind (and in VR). 

 

 

Yes, having buttons you can see and push is much easier than committing arbitrary keystrokes to memory.

 

Also, 9 times out of 10 I use autostart in the full fidelity models because the fun for me is flying and enjoying the world, not staring at buttons and MFDs while sitting in the hangar.

[Wulfen 44]

3 hours ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

 

I don't know to be honest. I own both FC3 aircraft and full fidelity models. I don't think it is easier to fly FC3 aircraft combat effective then full fidelity models. Well, you have to learn the start-up procedure, but in flight more often then not I find it easier to fly the full fidelity aircraft, because you don't have to remember tons of buttons you set to your Hotas (and which are different for every model / heli), but only have to remember where the buttons are in the aircraft cockpit, which is a lot easier at least with my mind (and in VR). 

I agree, the full fidelity models are more straight forward to navigate due to the clickability of their cockpits. Once you know your aircraft's layout, then it`s a non issue. Saying that, MAC is for new entrants to the franchise and is welcome, giving people the option to choose what suits them best.

Edited January 3 by Wulfen

[Jaws2002 754]

Another reheated  DCS meal. 

This guys sold the same thing a thousand times.   

Now, the new graphics engine looks really good, but, man, do the like to sell the same damn planes over and over.

 

I'm not surprised. We live in a dark era of flight sims development.

[Pudu 18]

B         

F

 

1

0

9

 

😝

 

 

(Just kidding)

 

 

 

(No, I'm not.)

[Wulfen 44]

19 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

Another reheated  DCS meal. 

This guys sold the same thing a thousand times.   

Now, the new graphics engine looks really good, but, man, do the like to sell the same damn planes over and over.

 

I'm not surprised. We live in a dark era of flight sims development.

If you have the full fidelity modules already, then I see no reason to buy it. So the point is a bit moot. 

Edited January 4 by Wulfen

[Wolf8312 142]

On 12/28/2018 at 1:21 AM, LuseKofte said:

On what to compare, in my taste, PO 2 was reinventing GB series, I havent had the same feeling since I flew LAGG 3 when the game came out, to be honest I prefer P 51 in DCS before P 47 in this. I am really confused. I guess planes that make you feel the flight dynamics the most in GB series is my all time favorites. in some planes I personally do not get that. In DCS the lack of environment is something you take with the brand. Flying choppers there is quite opposite , the flight dynamics is wonderful then

 

Yeah in VR too the chopper experience is close to perfect. Try flying the hero campaign in VR! You have to fly out to three different oil rigs in terrible weather conditions. Fantastic VR experience, and unlike the WW2 side of things where the best I can hope for are my own shoddy missions, the missions in the campaigns are polished and proffesional and utterly ooze atmosphere. Feels so close to the real thing some times. At one point out over the icy ocean I nearly lost control of the AC and down to a watery grave. I actually felt a sense of the panic and confusion for a moment, and the relief when I recovered was delicious!

 

On 1/4/2019 at 4:10 AM, Jaws2002 said:

Another reheated  DCS meal. 

This guys sold the same thing a thousand times.   

Now, the new graphics engine looks really good, but, man, do the like to sell the same damn planes over and over.

 

I'm not surprised. We live in a dark era of flight sims development.

 

You haven't been buying the same module over and over again have you? Cause to be fair if so, that would kinda be your fault! 😁

 

They're just trying to attract a bigger market for players who don't want the overwheming complexity of DCS and something more accessible. More players, means more money, more money means more development.

Edited January 4 by Wolf8312

[sevenless 626]

Quote

 

P-47D Thunderbolt, DCS: de Havilland Mosquito FB Mk.VI, and DCS: Fw 190 A-8 Shrike

These three aircraft are well underway and we plan to release one or more in 2019. With the addition of the new damage model, dynamic campaign, new World War II maps, and more units added to the World War II Assets Pack like the Ju-88, Bf 109G, C-47, A-20G, and others, DCS World War II will continue to grow and bring great new gameplay!

 

 

From the Weekend News. That dynamic Campaign mode and the other WW2 map would be interesting to see.

 

[Jaws2002 754]

1 hour ago, Wolf8312 said:

You haven't been buying the same module over and over again have you? Cause to be fair if so, that would kinda be your fault! 😁

 

They're just trying to attract a bigger market for players who don't want the overwheming complexity of DCS and something more accessible. More players, means more money, more money means more development.

 

 

No I haven't. They just make new versions of the game and bring back the same planes over and over.

 First was Lock On, then came Flaming Cliffs (same planes just a bit more advanced), then came DCS, then FC2, Then Black shark 2, then new versions of everything, and so on. Some of the planes are there since 2000. 

They should have started fresh at some point instead of carrying a bunch of archaic parts of this game from installment to installment. 

I mean, just look at the way they use skins in DCS. It's such a retarded obsolete way to deal with paint schemes, yet it's still used since the early days of Lock On.

  Maybe that's why the game is a hundred gigs. 

 

Edit..

 

And btw, some of the planes you had to buy again, if you wanted to use them in the new version of the game. Look at the Black shark. It was the first thing released in DCS, so it's not a ported plane from Lock On. You can't use the original plane in the current DCS. You have to buy it a second time... I liked that one, but I'm not buying the same plane again, just because they tweaked the graphics in the game.

Edited January 4 by Jaws2002

[nirvi 91]

 

[Trooper117 1322]

I'll never buy the thing, but visually it looks great 

[Danziger 1735]

I think MAC is made more for people like me. I don't have a lot of free time to spend on games but I love to blow off steam in flight sims. I've been using most of my free playing time working on my MiG-3 project so that is even less flying time for me. Lately I don't even have the stick connected and use the mouse aim function flying QMB missions to check my textures. I'll usually get distracted for a bit and blow some stuff up. 

 

 

Being able to jump into a jet for a quick 20-30min mission after work before the kid gets home sounds fun.

[dburne 1241]

5 minutes ago, Danziger said:

I think MAC is made more for people like me. I don't have a lot of free time to spend on games but I love to blow off steam in flight sims. I've been using most of my free playing time working on my MiG-3 project so that is even less flying time for me. Lately I don't even have the stick connected and use the mouse aim function flying QMB missions to check my textures. I'll usually get distracted for a bit and blow some stuff up. 

 

 

Being able to jump into a jet for a quick 20-30min mission after work before the kid gets home sounds fun.

 

Yeah seems to me they are taking a page from the successful business model of 1CGS and applying to the more modern aircraft for DCS.

[Wolf8312 142]

4 hours ago, Danziger said:

I think MAC is made more for people like me. I don't have a lot of free time to spend on games but I love to blow off steam in flight sims. I've been using most of my free playing time working on my MiG-3 project so that is even less flying time for me. Lately I don't even have the stick connected and use the mouse aim function flying QMB missions to check my textures. I'll usually get distracted for a bit and blow some stuff up. 

 

 

Being able to jump into a jet for a quick 20-30min mission after work before the kid gets home sounds fun.

 

Actually that's how I play DCS already, it's strange how nobody seems to realize how casual DCS can be, and it's probably a big reason I spend more time on DCS than IL-2. Very easy to knock up a few little missions and then quit.

I kinda miss the old IL-2 campaign for the same reason! I used to like just attacking an airport or a train when I didn't really have time to play for a long while, but still didn't want the tedious predictability of the QMB. Not saying new campaign was not much better, but it was nice to have someting more complete than the QMB, that could also be both realistic and casual/quick at the same time.

DCS is really easy to just throw a few units around an airfield, have a few planes taking off and a few randomized scripted surprises, and just go in and have fun for half an hour. All you need to do to play DCS casually is learn the ME, and how to take off, fly land and fight in the module you are using. But yeah I in order to play it casually to just have fun you do have to put some work in first!

[9./JG27golani79 233]

5 hours ago, dburne said:

 

Yeah seems to me they are taking a page from the successful business model of 1CGS and applying to the more modern aircraft for DCS.

 

Seems to me they are only doing what they already have done with Flaming Cliffs and are expanding it.

[SeaSerpent 540]

I don't like that Flaming Cliffs exists in the same universe as the StudySim planes.   I guess it is the fault of the multiplayer server operators as much as anybody's but it doesn't seem quite fair that some people are flying vastly simplified planes, while the flight sim wonks are flying fully complex planes.

[Monostripezebra 1015]

Just some more tunnel fun in the Yak

 

 

 

 

Edited January 6 by Monostripezebra

[Field-Ops 229]

23 hours ago, 9./JG27golani79 said:

 

Seems to me they are only doing what they already have done with Flaming Cliffs and are expanding it.

You mean recycle with minor additions along the way over the course of years

[9./JG27golani79 233]

I'm only around DCS since ~4 years but if I am not mistaken, it evolved out of LockOn Flaming Cliffs with the Blackshark and A-10c as later additions.

 

Why throw away Flaming Cliffs? 

They've updated the modules in regards of flight models and visuals and I think it is an appealing bundle for people who wanna get their feet wet with Jets but think they would be overwhelmed with full fidelity modules.

 

All the other modules were added  at a later point were'nt they?

 

MAC is just another upgrade in regards of the flaming cliffs part with additional aircraft from 3rd party and devs. I don't think that existing customers are the target audience - so where is the problem offering another bundle for people new to the genre who might be put off otherwise.