DCS

[Lusekofte]

2 hours ago, dbzero said:

For some reason your images of DCS look much better than what I getting in DCS and I have everything cranked up to max. 

Channel map is by far the best map I ever flown in, but it is heavy over cities down low. 

2 hours ago, dbzero said:

have the P-47 in both DCS and BOS. I prefer the one in IL2 myself.

I simply can't comprehend your opinion, but respect it

[CanadaOne]

10 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

Channel map is by far the best map I ever flown in, but it is heavy over cities down low. 

 

 

The DCS Channel Map is absolutely the best WWII map. I get pretty good performance, I think the 32GB RAM helps a lot. I like flying the Harrier  on the Channel Map. VSTOL on those excellently detailed airstrips is great. 

 

Also a big fan of the DCS P-51. Love that you can escort B-17s over the Channel. Doesn't take me long at all in the mission editor to set up a flight of Fortresses and have them bomb a flak zone over Calais. First class eye candy.

 

 

 

Edited October 1, 2020 by CanadaOne

[Reggie_Mental]

5 hours ago, messsucher said:

 

How you can criticize something which appear to be awesome simulation?

'Appears to be'

 

But is not.

[CanadaOne]

2 minutes ago, Reggie_Mental said:

'Appears to be'

 

But is not.

 

It's not? That's a shame. Because I'd like to own one.

 

Can you point me to a flightsim that offers a large variety of high-fidelity modern aircraft modules and accurate representations of complex high-tech weapons systems? I'll buy it.

 

Thanks. 

[Reggie_Mental]

7 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

It's not? That's a shame. Because I'd like to own one.

 

Can you point me to a flightsim that offers a large variety of high-fidelity modern aircraft modules and accurate representations of complex high-tech weapons systems? I'll buy it.

 

Thanks. 

That would be DCS. But it does not work at all well. It is a resource hog. Mine has been largely useless. Several of the DLCs are useless, the graphics are nothing special, and it is utterly impenetrable. Eagle Dynamic's support is inadequate, and they don't have any interest in supporting the user, just selling more DLC content. 

 

Even worse is the ED Forum. Charmless and arrogant edge lords who like to insult new members who ask questions about this horribly complicated 'game' have put me off it. And anything after 1960 is boring to fly, except perhaps the F5E, because of it's simplicity. BVR missiles and IR heat seekers? Booooring.

[Lusekofte]

18 minutes ago, Reggie_Mental said:

That would be DCS. But it does not work at all well. It is a resource hog. Mine has been largely useless. Several of the DLCs are useless, the graphics are nothing special, and it is utterly impenetrable. Eagle Dynamic's support is inadequate, and they don't have any interest in supporting the user, just selling more DLC content. 

 

Even worse is the ED Forum. Charmless and arrogant edge lords who like to insult new members who ask questions about this horribly complicated 'game' have put me off it. And anything after 1960 is boring to fly, except perhaps the F5E, because of it's simplicity. BVR missiles and IR heat seekers? Booooring.

False, Idk, False, False, MEH , MEH to true, True , 

LAst is your own mistake, if you bought a lot of modules feeling what you do, it is all on you. You could have downloaded DCS world taken the SU 25T for free and checked out the game. What I am seeing is a 

18 minutes ago, Reggie_Mental said:

Charmless and arrogant edge lords who like to insult

And that could possibly be the reason you met

 

18 minutes ago, Reggie_Mental said:

Charmless and arrogant edge lords who like to insult new members

But I do not know your story and approach, but your posting here did not in any way make me feel obligated to help

54 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

The DCS Channel Map is absolutely the best WWII map. I get pretty good performance, I think the 32GB RAM helps a lot. I like flying the Harrier  on the Channel Map. VSTOL on those excellently detailed airstrips is great. 

 

Also a big fan of the DCS P-51. Love that you can escort B-17s over the Channel. Doesn't take me long at all in the mission editor to set up a flight of Fortresses and have them bomb a flak zone over Calais. First class eye candy.

 

 

 

I am very happy with the P 47, P 51 has always been MEH for me, but in DCS I at least tolerate it, borderline to a little bit of liking. I never really used the asset pack , thank you for reminding me. I seriously consider take DCS from the shelve and kindly ask my son to borrow back my Rift S . We will see, I am busy, and when not I rather take a flight in 2020. I got this setup 

 intel Core i7-8700K Prosessor, ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming, S1151 Corsair Vengeance RGB DDR4 3200MHz 32GB, ASUS GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Turbo 11GBm Oculus Rift S

 

Edited October 1, 2020 by 216th_LuseKofte

[Reggie_Mental]

4 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

False, Idk, False, False, MEH , MEH to true, True , 

LAst is your own mistake, if you bought a lot of modules feeling what you do, it is all on you. You could have downloaded DCS world taken the SU 25T for free and checked out the game. What I am seeing is a 

And that could possibly be the reason you met

 

But I do not know your story and approach, but your posting here did not in any way make me feel obligated to help

What help could you be then?

 

You are saying my experience is false. Why would I make it up? I checked out the game, I loved DCS Black Shark and Flaming cliffs. But this iteration is up it's own arse now, and leaves customers behind

 

You seem to want to take this personally because I don't like DCS? Why?

[CanadaOne]

32 minutes ago, Reggie_Mental said:

That would be DCS. But it does not work at all well. It is a resource hog. Mine has been largely useless. Several of the DLCs are useless, the graphics are nothing special, and it is utterly impenetrable. Eagle Dynamic's support is inadequate, and they don't have any interest in supporting the user, just selling more DLC content. 

 

It's certainly not lightweight as far as hardware goes, but you have to pay for your pleasures. I have a 3700X/32GB RAM/2060 Super, which is a respectable rig I think, and it runs DCS very nicely. I don't get everything I want, but I get a lot. And I think the graphics are quite nice. The lighting and sense of distance are very well done, and the night lighting ranges from okay to really good. The clouds suck, that's for sure, but the terrain on the newer maps is first rate. And the night lighting in the cockpits is great. Certainly in the Harrier and the F-18.

 

As for support, it can be lacking, but I do like the frequent updates and the improvements to things I bought years ago in some cases.

 

 

Quote

Even worse is the ED Forum. Charmless and arrogant edge lords who like to insult new members who ask questions about this horribly complicated 'game' have put me off it.

 

 

It's the interweb. There is no shortage of snowflakes, petty pedants, and arrogant bastards in charge of forums. But I have found the majority of my experiences on the DCS forums to be pretty good. 

 

Quote

 

And anything after 1960 is boring to fly, except perhaps the F5E, because of it's simplicity. BVR missiles and IR heat seekers? Booooring.

 

That's a reflection on your particular taste in aircraft, DCS is not responsible for that. We all have our own preferences and have to work with what is available. DCS lacks an F-104. A cardinal sin if you ask me, but that does not mean I will refuse to have what fun I can with what is available. 

Edited October 1, 2020 by CanadaOne

[Reggie_Mental]

8 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

It's certainly not lightweight as far as hardware goes, but you have to pay for your pleasures. I have a 3700X/32GB RAM/2060 Super, which is a respectable rig I think, and it runs DCS very nicely. I don't get everything I want, but I get a lot. And I think the graphics are quite nice. The lighting and sense of distance are very well done, and the night lighting ranges from okay to really. The clouds suck, that's for sure, but the terrain on the newer maps is first rate. And the night lighting in the cockpits is great. Certainly in the Harrier and the F-18.

 

As for support, it can be lacking, but I do like the frequent updates and the improvements to things I bought years ago in some cases.

 

 

 

It's the interweb. There is no shortage of snowflakes, petty pedants, and arrogant bastards in charge of forums. But I have found the majority of my experiences on the DCS forums to be pretty good. 

 

 

That's a reflection on your particular taste in aircraft, DCS is not responsible for that. We all have our own preferences and have to work with what is available. DCS lacks an F-104. A cardinal sin if you ask me, but that does not mean I will refuse to have what fun I can with what is available. 

Well, I have had a close look at the DCS Polikarpov I-16. It's good, but the IL2 one is better all round. A lot better in my view.

 

I haven't tried it, but the I think it's probably a similar story with the Kurfurst and the Dora. The IL2 versions are better all round.

 

In terms of props, what does DCS do better than IL2? Nothing much if anything AFAICS.

 

And then there's the eye watering price! Steam never seem to have a sale on the DCS DLC modules either.

 

Yeah, an F104 would be an experience...

 

Edited October 2, 2020 by Reggie_Mental

[dbzero]

1 hour ago, CanadaOne said:

 

The DCS Channel Map is absolutely the best WWII map. I get pretty good performance, I think the 32GB RAM helps a lot. I like flying the Harrier  on the Channel Map. VSTOL on those excellently detailed airstrips is great. 

 

Also a big fan of the DCS P-51. Love that you can escort B-17s over the Channel. Doesn't take me long at all in the mission editor to set up a flight of Fortresses and have them bomb a flak zone over Calais. First class eye candy.

 

 

 

Hmmm tempting to get Channel map. Of course if there’s B-17s what good is it if you don’t have German aircraft to shoot them down? Another $100 to DCS....sigh.

 

A few years ago I saw some complaints about the German aircraft. How are they these days? They’ve been around a while.

 

I still have some missions I built in DCS one is F-15E hitting an airfield in Iran. I have 2 F-16s flying wild weasel and every time the S-300s would kill them. The Vipers had HARMs and ALQ pods but no matter so I had to downgrade the SAMs.

 

All ai controlled so don’t know if that’s makes a difference but probably does. I think the HARMs on Vipers got more modes recently so don’t know if that makes a difference 

[CanadaOne]

1 minute ago, Reggie_Mental said:

Well, I have had a close look at the DCS Polikarpov I-16. It's good, but the IL2 one is better all round. A lot better in fact.

 

I haven't tried it, but the I think it's a similar story with the Kurfurst and the Dora. The IL2 versions are better all round.

 

In terms of props, what does DCS do better than IL2? Nothing much if anything AFAICS.

 

Il2 is light years better than DCS as far as WWII A2A goes. The IL2 clouds and atmospherics, and just the general feeling of A2A in IL2, is fantastic. And the damage modelling in IL2 is the best by a mile. The damage modeling in DCS, as CEO Nick Grey puts it, "sucks balls!"

 

That does not mean DCS has nothing to offer. The P-47 and P-51 in DCS are gorgeous, and the Channel Map is the best WWII map available anywhere. Also, the WWII content is expanding in DCS, some of the content being free in updates. And the ability to create your own content in DCS is fast, easy, and fun. That goes a long, long way towards reliability. 

 

1 minute ago, Reggie_Mental said:

 

And then there's the eye watering price! Steam never seem to have a sale on the DCS DLC modules either.

 

The price is a killer to be sure. But I get all my DCS stuff on Steam and most of it was on sale, except for the maps which I buy on Day One.

[dbzero]

$79 USD for the A-10C fortunately I can get it for $9.99 probably cause I already have an A-10C

 

I also notice things like Combined Arms is more pricey these days. 
 

I guess while I’m still working and making good coin I may as well buy cause when I retire it will probably come down to buy things from DCS or buy food...
 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2020 by dbzero

[Reggie_Mental]

IL2 has atmosphere, both inside and outside the cockpit. DCS feels sterile. That atmosphere gets better with each update too. Although they seem to have a problem with grass. I had to turn it off in the config in the end. It looked silly. I know soviet airfields were rough and ready, but US/RAF and German generally were not so. There seems to be only two settings for grass: Too much or none.

 

DLC prices are high on Steam, but having been stung before, I'll pay for Steam and have peace of mind. When Steam downloads and installs, you know they have downloaded and installed it - and it will work. (or your money back)

[CanadaOne]

28 minutes ago, dbzero said:

Hmmm tempting to get Channel map. Of course if there’s B-17s what good is it if you don’t have German aircraft to shoot them down? Another $100 to DCS....sigh.

 

A few years ago I saw some complaints about the German aircraft. How are they these days? They’ve been around a while.

 

I still have some missions I built in DCS one is F-15E hitting an airfield in Iran. I have 2 F-16s flying wild weasel and every time the S-300s would kill them. The Vipers had HARMs and ALQ pods but no matter so I had to downgrade the SAMs.

 

All ai controlled so don’t know if that’s makes a difference but probably does. I think the HARMs on Vipers got more modes recently so don’t know if that makes a difference 

 

I bought the 109 (on sale) just to get the feeling of hopping the Channel in a German bird. It's fun and flies well. I tried all the German planes during the "Great Covid Free DCS Trial of 2020" and liked the 109 the most. The cockpit could use some love, that's for sure. But then I'm not a big fan of German planes so I'm not the best person to ask.

 

I have limited time hunting SAMs since most of my jet time is in the Harrier. And I tend to fly fast and very, very low. 500 knots at 50' and then pop up and hit them with the AGM-112 or rockets. Good fun. The F-18 has a whomp more SEAD ability, but I'm going to get into it over the winter when we're all locked down and work slows up.

[unlikely_spider]

1 hour ago, Reggie_Mental said:

IL2 has atmosphere, both inside and outside the cockpit. DCS feels sterile.

Weird - I feel the opposite. The story, chatter, and dialog in each DCS campaign, and especially the newer ones, creates enough atmosphere to blow most IL-2 campaigns out of the water. The repetitive, generic radio calls in GB make them seem lacking in atmosphere to me.

Check out any of the campaigns by Reflected or Baltic Dragon. They are world class and fully voice acted. You get attached to your wingmen, which is impossible in IL-2.

Though to be fair I haven't bought the P-47 campaign here yet, so that may have changed just recently. Finally they are catching up in that department.

Edited October 2, 2020 by unlikely_spider

[DBFlyguy]

24 minutes ago, unlikely_spider said:

Weird - I feel the opposite. The story, chatter, and dialog in each DCS campaign, and especially the newer ones, creates enough atmosphere to blow most IL-2 campaigns out of the water. The repetitive, generic radio calls in GB make them seem lacking in atmosphere to me.

Check out any of the campaigns by Reflected or Baltic Dragon. They are world class and fully voice acted. You get attached to your wingmen, which is impossible in IL-2.

Though to be fair I haven't bought the P-47 campaign here yet, so that may have changed just recently. Finally they are catching up in that department.

 

All of those payware DCS campaigns are highly scripted and they break pretty often including the most recent Raven One from Baltic Dragon,  just have a look at the patch notes every couple of weeks.  IL-2 is light years ahead of what DCS offers for single player replayability...objectively, its not even close.  Maybe in 5 or so years when DCS actually has that dynamic campaign engine they've been working on it'll be more of a honest comparison.  The IL-2 radio chatter could definitely use a work over but I still prefer it over the canned and robotic stuff DCS offers currently out the box.

[unlikely_spider]

29 minutes ago, DBFlyguy said:

 

All of those payware DCS campaigns are highly scripted and they break pretty often including the most recent Raven One from Baltic Dragon,  just have a look at the patch notes every couple of weeks.  IL-2 is light years ahead of what DCS offers for single player replayability...objectively, its not even close.  Maybe in 5 or so years when DCS actually has that dynamic campaign engine they've been working on it'll be more of a honest comparison.  The IL-2 radio chatter could definitely use a work over but I still prefer it over the canned and robotic stuff DCS offers currently out the box.

Objectively?

I have many, many hours in campaigns in both sims, as that is my main mode of play. I can't say I encounter more bugs in one vs the other.

I can say that DCS campaigns are more cinematic, and I probably have more sweat-inducing and simply long-lasting memorable moments in the DCS ones.

 

Edit - to be fair, there was a bug in DCS this year that broke the AI taxiing so many campaigns didn't work. But they patched it pretty quickly.

And I see the patches every two weeks as a good thing, do you not? They are quite responsive to issues brought up in the forums.

Edited October 2, 2020 by unlikely_spider

[dbzero]

I bought the Channel map. It was 20% off and used bonus points to knock more off price. Look good, but it didn’t strike me as tremendously better than IL2 maps. I’ll have to do a more thorough comparison to see.

 

Also got the A10C update for $9.99

 

One thing I wish DCS had was a padlock view like other sims. There is a padlock but doesn’t seem to work like I’m used to in other sims.

[Art-J]

8 hours ago, dbzero said:

Just like DCS itself opinions vary like assholes ?

 

Don’t know what it is but my DCS looks sorta washed out. Not like the pretty pics...

 

Just crank the default idiotic 2.2 gamma value down to something reasonable, like around 1.8-ish and set up your missions to low-sun hours (morning, evening, like on all these fancy trailers :)). That's enough to make the game look much prettier. The same tricks apply to Il-2GB or any videogame when you think about it.

 

About "Charmless and arrogant edge lords who like to insult", I find comparable numbers of them here as well, with BSR leading their ranks, but when tech help tips are needed, both forums provide similar support from good guys in my experience.

[Lusekofte]

6 hours ago, Reggie_Mental said:

You are saying my experience is false

No I am not saying your expirience is false, I say the statement is false. You said it as a fact, there are thousands that do not agree. Personally I agree in some of your statements. There is a reason I do not use that forum. My expirience is pretty similar with yours about moderating. They have moderated people for what said on this forum.

I have met friendly souls over there too. 

Your tirade here , well did not give a feeling of a person that was posting to get help, it was more a tirade of frustration. And I can relate to that, I have been very frustrated myself. But that won't bring help your way.

Do not misunderstand me, I have nothing against you, I was just emplying that if this was the tone of your approach over at ED forum I can understand their reaction, but that I d not know.

10 hours ago, Ace_Pilto said:

Well, try doing it in old Il-2 or Arma and it's hard there too. With that said, they are adding a lot more to it but it remains a sitch flicking sim for me.

I respect your opinion, Sir. For me it got a much better Single player, and is just give  so much more sence of acomplishment doing. All on their own. I uninstalled GB simply because it bored me to death. I will put it on my third drive when BON is out to check it out. And depending on their next build will say if it stays.

It is a good solid game , but their priorities (witch I respect) do not at all fit my interest. 

[Lusekofte]

7 hours ago, Reggie_Mental said:

Well, I have had a close look at the DCS Polikarpov I-16. It's good, but the IL2 one is better all round. A lot better in my view.

This is also a personal opinion. I feel quite the opposite. The P 47 , P 51 and I 16 in DCS is far better than GB. For the rest Spit is ok once flying but Zi like GB spits better. 
Dora is in my opinion also better in GB 

But I flown them only when new. It is all subjective and not scientific. But I do not mind the fact you like GB better, in fact I wish I did. 
GB is fighter / dogfight oriented. It is the only aspect that can be evolved in the long run. The rest is just simplified routine. Push [A] steer drop go home or get shot down. If spotted, no chance. If not, no problem

Edited October 2, 2020 by 216th_LuseKofte

[CanadaOne]

2 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

This is also a personal opinion. I feel quite the opposite. The P 47 , P 51 and I 16 in DCS is far better than GB. For the rest Spit is ok once flying but Zi like GB spits better. 
Dora is in my opinion also better in GB 

But I flown them only when new. It is all subjective and not scientific. But I do not mind the fact you like GB better, in fact I wish I did. 
GB is fighter / dogfight oriented. It is the only aspect that can be evolved in the long run. The rest is just simplified routine. Push [A] steer drop go home or get shot down. If spotted, no chance. If not, no problem

 

I tried the DCS Spitfire and didn't like it at all. I found it too twitchy. But I still like the DCS P-51 better. Great looking plane and feels more like a plane and not a toy.

 

And it's gorgeous. I think it was my first purchased plane. 

 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2020 by CanadaOne

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, CanadaOne said:

I tried the DCS Spitfire and didn't like it at all. I found it too twitchy.

I just doesn't fly like a Spitfire. Keeps you busy with things differently that the real airctaft does. It ended my interest in DCS WW2 stuff, althgh the Mustang is a really nice module.

[CanadaOne]

1 minute ago, ZachariasX said:

I just doesn't fly like a Spitfire. Keeps you busy with things differently that the real airctaft does. It ended my interest in DCS WW2 stuff, althgh the Mustang is a really nice module.

 

Yeah, the DCS Mustang is really nice. 

 

I gave the 109 a quick spin this morning. Still a fun plane. I'd like to see some textures improved, but some of the DCS 109 cockpit is pretty nice.

 

[dbzero]

When I bought the DCS Spitfire a long while back it was terrible. Said to myself I paid for this? Haven’t touched it since, but gave it a try this morning and it’s much better. Almost feels like the P-51. 
 

The P-51 and P-47 look great I own both. The F86 and Mig15 are fun too.

 

As mentioned the damage modeling leaves much to be desired. I heard the same complaints about the German planes too-this was a while back.

 

The F-16 when it was first released apparently had no damage modeling. I didn’t buy the Viper when it first released-paying $79 for something with no damage modeling was no bueno and don’t know if damage modeling has been added. I did pick up the Viper on sale.

 

I would think this is a big deal for something that simulates air combat. Damage modeling especially for WW2 combat would be something you’d want to get right.

 

I’ve done some dogfights in DCS in the planes I own-P-51, P-47 and Spitfire. I still prefer IL2. Feels much more polished.

 

Another thing that would be nice is when you buy a new map in DCS a few prebuilt missions in that map would be nice. 
 

Later on I’ll try a few F-86 vs Mig-15 dogfights.

 

I know it’s a broken record, but ED needs to stop putting out new stuff and work on what they already have. Some TLC and polish would really go a long way with what they already have.

Edited October 2, 2020 by dbzero

[DD_Fenrir]

The DCS Spitfire is magnificent - but only if you manually adjust your control curves to give you a stick displacement to critical AoA that is analogous to the real thing.

Otherwise it will feel super twitchy and you will be over-correcting constantly.

 

What do I mean?

 

It comes down to ergonomics and stick geometry, and crucially an enormous mis-match between the physical dimensions of the real spitfire control column and the average PC desktop joystick controller.

Bear in mind the full scale Spitfire control column was some ~900 mm from it's pivot point to the top of the stick; actual test flight data shows that to reach critical AoA from trim neutral required only 3/4" of stick displacement - that's 19.5mm; this equates to ~1.2° of stick rotation. So even in the real aircraft it required something of a light touch.

The trouble starts when you scale this down to the 15-20cm moment arm of a typical desktop joystick - that results in a required stick displacement to stall the plane of only 3-4mm.

3-4mm!!!

This makes it very very difficult to fly.

The trick is to adjust your curves so that it gives you a stick displacement more analogous to the real thing.

I have a MSFFB2 with a pivot to top stick length of ~19cm and these are my custom control curves:

0 2 4 6 8 12 16 22 30 50 100

Bear in mind that the longer the joystick you use the less shallow that initial gradient on the curve will need to be; ultimately it will take some trial and error on your behalf with the hardware you own to find a sweet spot you are happy with.

If you wish to get some return on your investment in the DCS Spitfire IX then I strongly suggest you try this out. If you do, I hope this makes your Spitfire flying a more controllable and pleasant experience.

[9./JG27golani79]

37 minutes ago, DD_Fenrir said:

I have a MSFFB2 with a pivot to top stick length of ~19cm and these are my custom control curves:

0 2 4 6 8 12 16 22 30 50 100

 

 

Do you also have some advice on curves for a MSFFB2 without extension?

All the warbirds seem fine for me without any curves - except the Spitfire which is very twitchy.

[Blooddawn1942]

The Hog update is incredible! 

Just fell in love for the... donno 5th or 6th time with this ugly bitch again. 

And every time I was sure I'm done with it....Like Sex with the Ex.. ?

[DD_Fenrir]

No extensions Golani - that measurement of ~19cm is my  approximation of the stock stick length measurement + an estimated allowance for the apparent pivot point.

[Gambit21]

What's the latest scuttlebutt on a DCS Zero?

 

[BraveSirRobin]

15 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

What's the latest scuttlebutt on a DCS Zero?

 

We’re inThe Final Countdown.

[CanadaOne]

24 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

What's the latest scuttlebutt on a DCS Zero?

 

 

Due two-weeks before the IL2 Zero. 

[Gambit21]

18 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

Due two-weeks before the IL2 Zero. 

 

I can wait another 2 weeks if that were the case.

[CanadaOne]

18 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

I can wait another 2 weeks if that were the case.

 

It will be three-weeks for that.

[dbzero]

As much as I want a Pacific version of IL2 a DCS Zero is a pass for me. Without a Pacific theater and appropriate opponents to fight its holds Zero interest.

 

Same reason no interest in I-16. In IL2 yes -has a place and feel appropriate.In  DCS meh. Just feels out of place.

 

If I want something like the I-16 or Zero to just fly around in I’ll wait till it comes out in FS2020.

 

Be interesting to hear what the damage modeling will be on a DCS Zero will be. Will it be like the F-16 was at release as non-existent damage modeling or as sturdy as a P-51 or P-47...

 

I’d get excited if IL2 released a Zero. I’d even pay for a DLC. You already have P-39s, P-40s and A-20s as well as P-38s which would allow for some appropriate historical battles and the damage modeling would be present and probably appropriate at release.

 

While it’s true the P-51 and P-47 did encounter the Zero and DCS has them, so does IL2. Seems like a not so fair matchup. 
 

This is what I think when I hear DCS. Zero seems out of place.

 

 

 

Edited October 3, 2020 by dbzero

[RedRider]

If they ever add proper damage modeling then DCS could become a proper competitor to IL-2. Their flight model's are superior (just speaking from my experience with their P-51 module), but their damage model kills it. IL-2's damage model and the "feel" of their war theater environments just absolutely dominate, in my opinion.

 

It's not an issue of cost. For most of us, this is our main hobby and we spend far, far greater amounts on hardware supporting the software. Give me a full fledged WW2 sim and I'll spend A LOT.  

[dbzero]

10 hours ago, RedRider said:

If they ever add proper damage modeling then DCS could become a proper competitor to IL-2. Their flight model's are superior (just speaking from my experience with their P-51 module), but their damage model kills it. IL-2's damage model and the "feel" of their war theater environments just absolutely dominate, in my opinion.

 

It's not an issue of cost. For most of us, this is our main hobby and we spend far, far greater amounts on hardware supporting the software. Give me a full fledged WW2 sim and I'll spend A LOT.  

Cost may be a factor to many. Some of these planes cost $79. My nephew wanted to get DCS but when he saw the cost said no. He still has college loans to pay off. 
 

The aircraft in DCS are made by a number of different devs and quality can be uneven. The Mig-19 got a lot of comments for its F-16 like performance when first released. 
 

Many like the Mirage2000 have limited weapon load outs and some have systems that are still missing or incomplete.

 

Paying $79 for an aircraft module that is incomplete is a no go for many. The initial investment for the software and hardware to play DCS is not inconsequential for many - and the global economy isn’t doing that well and isn’t projected to get better anytime soon. 
 

Once the massive government stimulus ends you’re going to see a lot of people in dire straights. We’re the few fortunate ones who can afford this.

[Trooper117]

This is a flight sim 'game'... no question about it.

Yes, it puts you the player in an immersive environment where you can 'pretend' you are fighting in a WWII combat aircraft.

It's nothing other than that I'm afraid.

Is it good fun, yes... do you have to apply yourself and gain a bit of knowledge, yes... is it like sitting in a real military simulator?... absolutely not, not by a long chalk.

 

[AndyJWest]

It's a PC shuffling bits around to make the pixels on your monitor light up.

[messsucher]

2 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

This is a flight sim 'game'... no question about it.

Yes, it puts you the player in an immersive environment where you can 'pretend' you are fighting in a WWII combat aircraft.

It's nothing other than that I'm afraid.

Is it good fun, yes... do you have to apply yourself and gain a bit of knowledge, yes... is it like sitting in a real military simulator?... absolutely not, not by a long chalk.

 

 

Of course it is a game, there is not question about that. To be more specific it is light WW2 home computer air combat simulator game. This is among the most obvious things in the world. But so what?