DCS

[CanadaOne]

44 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

Is that a pre-quel to Blade Runner 2049?

 

Or Cyberpunk 2077. 

[BOO]

14 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

So there I am, having a lovely drive up the coast towards Lebanon, and I notice a sign for French tourism. Time travel even.

 

 

 

DCS is better from the air. Never understood the desire to drive in a map so (necessarily) generically detailed and low res that it cannot possibly represent the real world to any convincing degree up close. Bad enough in a helo.   I just dont get the desire/over -optimism on the part of devs various over the years to even try to combine land and air warfare in a single map and moreover persist with it. GB at least recognizes this with its higher res tank maps but even they still fall someway short at present me).  Each to their own though. 

 

BTW that billboard is the wrong way around or on the wrong side of the road (take your pick) and, more commonly, such billboards tend use a centrally positioned pole from what Ive seen. Like I say, details.....lack of .....much better at 500mph and/or 15000ft , ya-de-ya. 

 

Shame also that they insist on plugging their products instead of making art for those signs that actually fits the map. 

[CanadaOne]

8 minutes ago, BOO said:

DCS is better from the air. Never understood the desire to drive in a map so (necessarily) generically detailed and low res that it cannot possibly represent the real world to any convincing degree up close. Bad enough in a helo.   I just dont get the desire/over -optimism on the part of devs various over the years to even try to combine land and air warfare in a single map and moreover persist with it. GB at least recognizes this with its higher res tank maps but even they still fall someway short at present me).  Each to their own though. 

 

BTW that billboard is the wrong way around or on the wrong side of the road (take your pick) and, more commonly, such billboards tend use a centrally positioned pole from what Ive seen. Like I say, details.....lack of .....much better at 500mph and/or 15000ft , ya-de-ya. 

 

Shame also that they insist on plugging their products instead of making art for those signs that actually fits the map. 

 

I thought the sign was kinda funny. There are even sailboats with DCS on the sail. It's a game and ya gotta have some fun.  

 

A lot of the ground is low res up close to be sure, and some of the vehicle mechanics are a bit on the arcade side of things (I'm being polite), but there is some decent ground action to be had if you're willing to go with the flow and accept the limitations. There are a dozens of ground vehicles to use and some of them are good fun, especially the AAA. I went tearing through an airbase last night in a HUMVEE at 80MPH with a .50cal on top shooting up Migs on the ground like a la Desert Rats. It was entertaining in its own way. And as the vehicles get better textures and better maps come out, it gets more enjoyable. 

 

Combined arms is about $30 on sale and there's actually a lot to it. 

[BOO]

5 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

I thought the sign was kinda funny. There are even sailboats with DCS on the sail. It's a game and ya gotta have some fun.  

Combined arms is about $30 on sale and there's actually a lot to it. 

Totally agree - and I do - lots. Mission building in DCS is actually fun and pretty user friendly and thats how i spend my time mostly. And i learn about stuff whilst doing it (confession - until my last KA50 mission I thought South Ossetia wasnt a real thing - deep apologies to any South Ossetians - I do acknowledge your existence now - but you still lose on this occasion - well y'gotta pick a side)

 

 Just not driving though ?  By the way - do those boats move whilst on the sail? ? Again not something you notice at 500mph ?

 

I switch twix the KA50, Harrier and F14 at present as I can find contrives and workarounds in these that stop me going WTF too often (well less so in the Harrier and most of my time in the Cat is spent watching my carrier deck scripts and movements but.......). Occasionally if I find a good challenging road Ill bring out the Mig21 (cos - popping chutes never gets old) to land on it and the Huey gets aired when i want to listen to CCR for a bit and fire a lot of ammo in a not too accurate manner. 

 

My £30 is going on the Mil-8 this sale for one reason only - It pleases @216th_LuseKofte. And if it keeps him even mildly happy it MUST be good! LOL

[CanadaOne]

One must please LuseKofte. When he gets grumpy, the whole world weeps. 

 

Like you, I'm in the mission editor non-stop. I haven't flown anything but an ME flight in forever.  And yes, the sailboats do move. The South Ossetians enjoy water sports.

[dburne]

35 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

One must please LuseKofte. When he gets grumpy, the whole world weeps. 

 

Like you, I'm in the mission editor non-stop. I haven't flown anything but an ME flight in forever.  And yes, the sailboats do move. The South Ossetians enjoy water sports.

 

One of these days I am going to have to give that ME a try.

Perhaps I might have better luck with it than I am having learning the Hornet for combat.

[Rei-sen]

2 hours ago, BOO said:

DCS is better from the air. Never understood the desire to drive in a map so (necessarily) generically detailed and low res that it cannot possibly represent the real world to any convincing degree up close. Bad enough in a helo. 

Idk about this map, but the Channel map is beautiful even up close. 

[BOO]

16 minutes ago, Arthur-A said:

Idk about this map, but the Channel map is beautiful even up close. 

Beautiful yes but I cant get past the fact that the iconic seafront of Dunkirk is missing entire, those out of place chemi tanks in every farm in Kent and the lack of Oasthouses. That there are also more variations of park bench than bridges and that those bridges are often blocking the waterways they run over also grates and I suspect will grate even more once the Mossie and its low level canal navigating recreations arrive. 

 

Im a pedant. Cant help it.

1 hour ago, dburne said:

 

One of these days I am going to have to give that ME a try.

Perhaps I might have better luck with it than I am having learning the Hornet for combat.

 

Its easy to get the basics and you can do a lot with it to help you learn stuff in increments. For instance, menu switchable SAM sites in increasing levels of skill or numbers semi intelligent IADS or enforced speed and alt zones.  

[dburne]

25 minutes ago, BOO said:

 

 

Its easy to get the basics and you can do a lot with it to help you learn stuff in increments. For instance, menu switchable SAM sites in increasing levels of skill or numbers semi intelligent IADS or enforced speed and alt zones.  

 

Thanks for the motivation!

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, Arthur-A said:

Idk about this map, but the Channel map is beautiful even up close. 

I wish for a Tiger moth in that map

[Rei-sen]

1 hour ago, BOO said:

Beautiful yes but I cant get past the fact that the iconic seafront of Dunkirk is missing entire, those out of place chemi tanks in every farm in Kent and the lack of Oasthouses. That there are also more variations of park bench than bridges and that those bridges are often blocking the waterways they run over also grates and I suspect will grate even more once the Mossie and its low level canal navigating recreations arrive. 

It may not be accurate and have some issues here and there but overall it is a very nice map. And if we compare it to the Rheinland map..

6 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I wish for a Tiger moth in that map

And a Hurricane

[CanadaOne]

5 hours ago, dburne said:

 

One of these days I am going to have to give that ME a try.

Perhaps I might have better luck with it than I am having learning the Hornet for combat.

 

The DCS ME is a masterpiece in that a bonehead like me can create a flight literally in seconds.

 

You know what, I'll do a quick test, hold on:

 

Okay, I was in a plane in DCS and wanted to change my flight. As soon as I hit Esc to end the flight I hit the stopwatch. I went back to the ME, changed the map, changed the plane, changed weather and time of day, put an enemy ground vehicle down with a waypoint, and I was back in the plane flying in exactly... 66 seconds. That's a proper ME. It gives you the option to make a custom flight fast and easy. Or you can take your time. It's nice to have the choice.

 

 

[dburne]

12 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

 

The DCS ME is a masterpiece in that a bonehead like me can create a flight literally in seconds.

 

You know what, I'll do a quick test, hold on:

 

Okay, I was in a plane in DCS and wanted to change my flight. As soon as I hit Esc to end the flight I hit the stopwatch. I went back to the ME, changed the map, changed the plane, changed weather and time of day, put an enemy ground vehicle down with a waypoint, and I was back in the plane flying in exactly... 66 seconds. That's a proper ME. It gives you the option to make a custom flight fast and easy. Or you can take your time. It's nice to have the choice.

 

 

 

Ok thanks guess I will have to give it a whirl.

[BOO]

18 hours ago, Arthur-A said:

It may not be accurate and have some issues here and there but overall it is a very nice map. And if we compare it to the Rheinland map..

 

I hear ya!

[Lusekofte]

7 hours ago, dburne said:

 

Ok thanks guess I will have to give it a whirl.

Once you figure out the basics. It is easy. 

I find some instant action very good. And all I do is change the airplane and save it for that plane. It is done in 10 second. I know it can be as advanced and powerful you like it to be. It got a lot of features, not meant for us not that into it. 

[CanadaOne]

-10, the whole region is on lockdown, as well as being asleep and/or hungover, good time to fly.

 

Ain't this da shizzle! That's a great map.

 

 

[Gambit21]

5 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

the whole region is on lockdown, 

 

 

My peeps are out and about - give them a wave.

[Jade_Monkey]

I've been flying the P-47D and the Channel map for a couple of weeks, and I thought I would share my first impressions for those who wonder how they compare to IL2's P-47D-28.

This is not meant to be an apples to apples comparison, i know the cost, the time to market, performance, and other factors are very different and they need to be taken into account if you want a wholistic comparison.

 

 

Channel map and P-47D Comparison with BOX

Overall, I think they are both really well done. DCS has higher textures for the plane but the gap is closing fast (especially with the last IL2 update).

You can see the poly count is still higher in DCS for some of the small switches in the cockpit but nothing is a deal breaker, I think both planes hold their own very well.

 

Things I like better in IL2: 

• The visuals on the wing surfaces, rivets, and metallic reflection look better to me in IL2.
• The engine sound on the ground, the deeper noise.
• Damage model
• Cockpit reflections on gauges and canopy.
• Much easier to spot planes and ground units. They are incredibly blurry in DCS even at relatively close distances (1000m over a truck or AAA on the ground).
• Autolevel feature. This is not historical for the P-47 but I think it's indispensable for a flight sim. After all we all need to check the phone, go to the bathroom, etc. 

Thinks I like better in DCS:

• Airfields are incredibly detailed, this is probably the biggest difference for me. They feel very real, there is stuff everywhere and there are lots of details in the groud textures. Also short grass.
• The height map "resolution" for the southern part of England is very detailed, you can really see small hills and nuanced terrain differences. I hope some of this will make it to some parts of BON based on what they learnt from TC.
• Higher polygon count in cockpit, nothing too dramatic though.
• Better external sounds, they seem like recordings instead of artificially generated engine sounds.
• The gunsight in VR doesnt depend on your eye, it works seamlessly between both eyes and it's color strength does not fade away when you move your head in the cockpit.
• Bullets and tracers seem less linear. I'm not a subject matter expert, but from a regular Joe's perspective it seems more believable.
• External fuel tanks, they just look great. I look forward to having them in IL2 once they work on that feature.
• More sounds that provide immersion:
  • wheels on the ground make that sound when you drive over gravel
  • the electic motor closing the P47 cockpit has a sound in DCS.
  • There is some clink/rattle sound in the plane when flying as if there was some loose metal piece somewhere. Not sure how much I like this one, but I like the general idea of more sounds for immersion.
  •  

Interesting differences i've noticed (neither good nor bad):

• The speed of the P47 canopy open/close in DCS is much slower using the electric motor
• The speed of closing the P47 cowl flaps is a lot slower in DCS
• The 3D of the P47 cowl flaps is modeled differently, even fully closed they still get on your way in DCS while in IL2 they are more flush to the body of the plane.
• There is a noticeable difference between both games in terms of FOV for all planes. I think by design IL2 looks like the pilot is smaller and the cockpit feels larger, while DCS feels like you are filling up the cockpit more and all instruments are slightly closer to you.

 

Things observed in the Channel Map and DCS platform that I would like to be added to IL2 at some point:

• Detailed airfields and terrain.
  • More airfield specific objets for ambiance.
  • Some small details on the ground decals: oil stains on airfields, skid marks, etc.
• Textures under towns are a bit more defined, I would like BON to have higher resolution decals on the ground to avoid the effect of having a building object on top of a grass field. BOBP made progress there but I would like to see higher res textures in that department.
• The extra sounds are a nice touch (gravel under wheel, electric motor etc)
• Adding static vehicles to the world by default: harbours have small fishing boats, there are trucks and cars parked all over the map. I saw some of this in the new Velikie Luki summer map, I have hope that it will carry over to the new BON map.
• The explosion effects are a bit more fluid. Bombs and even the smoke coming out of the Flak 88 seem to have higher "fps" in their animation. 

 

Verdict:

I think the plane and the map are both well done and I would recommend them on a sale.

However, I have my reservations about how much fun they will be in the long run. Factors like the damage model, historical units available to fill the map with WWII enemies, and lack of a career mode really bring down the value of DCS.

Despite a long list of items I think DCS does well, I want those things added to IL2 instead of playing DCS. At the end of the day if I want to enjoy flying and shooting I end up in IL2.

I do look forward to the Reflected Simulations campaign for the P-47D, they are always very detailed and entertaining.

Edited January 1, 2021 by Jade_Monkey

[Lusekofte]

10 minutes ago, Jade_Monkey said:

However, I have my reservations about how much fun they will be in the long run

Nice sum up 

I know only my patience for flying P 47 in channel map exceed any GB map by 100 times. 

Internals and FM is just so ahead, and the map is just georgious. 

The same go for the I 16,. It feel real in DCS. 

 

 

 

[Robli]

22 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

Internals and FM is just so ahead

 

What makes you conclude that FM is ahead? To me it seemed very surprising how maneuverable P47 felt in DCS. Somehow Il2's FM for such a heavy plane felt more believable, but obviously I have never been in one in real life.

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, Robli said:

 

What makes you conclude that FM is ahead? To me it seemed very surprising how maneuverable P47 felt in DCS. Somehow Il2's FM for such a heavy plane felt more believable, but obviously I have never been in one in real life.

The heavy feel to it is in DCS too. But it got more agility down low, but not enough to keep up with some other fighters. 

I have not said what is correct , I said I liked it better.   I would have elaborated more on the subject but find your tone rather patronizing, however good for you if you like GB P 47 better. Personally I do not like it at all I respect any other opinion on it, I am not married to it. I just pitched in my feeling about it to Jade, and I liked what he had to say

Edited January 2, 2021 by 216th_LuseKofte

[Robli]

20 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

If you stopped being so fucking patronizing...

 

Uhh, seriously? Just because I asked what made you feel that P47 FM in DCS was ahead of IL2's?

No worries, I won't be 'patronizing' you.

[Lusekofte]

5 minutes ago, Robli said:

 

Uhh, seriously? Just because I asked what made you feel that P47 FM in DCS was ahead of IL2's?

No worries, I won't be 'patronizing' you.

I changed that, but I am simply fed up by people putting words in my mouth. It was not fair taking on you. I apologize, I never endeavor in a FM debate , most here knows it. I simply like how DCS P 47 FM is. To my use it suit me fine. 

GB one I can rather fly a IL 2. It do not disintegrate when hit by a bullet

Edited January 2, 2021 by 216th_LuseKofte

[ST_Catchov]

23 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

 I am simply fed up by people putting words in my mouth.

 

So you're saying DCS is great and GB is crap.  

 

 

 

 

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, ST_Catchov said:

 

So you're saying DCS is great and GB is crap.  

 

 

 

 

HAH! No

[CanadaOne]

2 hours ago, ST_Catchov said:

 

So you're saying DCS is great and GB is crap.  

 

Anyone who is being honest knows they are both great. 

 

IL2 has much better WWII A2A action and the atmospherics and fine touches in IL2 are fantastic. Bust a 109 just as it hits the clouds and you get the first class smoke and fire and debris and then you notice the droplets from the cloud moisture on the cockpit, all of it mixing together. And you get that at with good FPS. Artistically, it's gorgeous!

 

DCS has better maps, nicer cockpits, and a far better system for the player to create his own flights.

[Rei-sen]

In DCS the P-47 is a real fighter. It's heavy, but still it feels like a fighter. The boxed version feels like shit.

[Bremspropeller]

9 hours ago, Arthur-A said:

In DCS the P-47 is a real fighter. It's heavy, but still it feels like a fighter. The boxed version feels like shit.

 

True. We did a fun dogfight yesterday - P-47 vs several bombers, incl. IL-2 (granted, at low altitude) and the Jug could barely hold it's own.

Something is still amiss.

[itsbillyfrazier]

@Jade_Monkey - That's a nice write up and seems a balanced comparison, although i have very little experience in DCS.

 

I picked up the Huey in DCS months ago as i wanted to try out helicopters, but i haven't played it much.

 

DCS seems to show my PC's age (i6700k, 32GB RAM, GTX980ti).  il-2 is much more forgiving to my current specs.

 

I wouldn't mind picking up some WW2 modules in DCS and maybe the channel map in the sale.

 

Are there any modules you would recommend?

[Tyberan]

Ive been having a ball with the F14. Tried out the F16 today and man it just seems so complicated in comparison, dont get me wrong it was awesome in its own way but the F14 has that great character. 

[Lusekofte]

When it comes to US fighters DM I am pretty sure GB is struggling vs DCS. 

To me using the P 47 in GB as a ground pounder make no sense at all. It get hit in the engine and stop. While doing the same with IL 2 actually give better odds. If your not going above 20 000 feet it make little to none sense flying it. 

In DCS it make a lot of sense choosing it. That is the only difference I care about. Doing ground attack in GB servers is a death wish because you got all these fighters waiting for you. So your stuck with SP, SP in DCS is better, plane and simple. GB is a great sim. Just not playable for me. 

 

[DD_Arthur]

11 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

DCS has better maps, nicer cockpits, and a far better system for the player to create his own flights.

 

Whilst I agree that the ME in DCS is far better for the average user (thats me) and some of the jets are sublime, I remain totally unconvinced by the WW2 offering.  i haven't got the channel map or the P47 as I feel I got my fingers burnt by the DCS Normandy map which is still horrible as far as I'm concerned.  The cockpits?  I have to say I prefer the GBS ones, especially in VR.

Flight models?  Hmmm.....yeah....I remain unconvinced.  What I think DCS has got very right are sounds and throttle response.  The rest? Not so much.....

[CanadaOne]

7 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

 

Whilst I agree that the ME in DCS is far better for the average user (thats me) and some of the jets are sublime, I remain totally unconvinced by the WW2 offering.  i haven't got the channel map or the P47 as I feel I got my fingers burnt by the DCS Normandy map which is still horrible as far as I'm concerned.  The cockpits?  I have to say I prefer the GBS ones, especially in VR.

Flight models?  Hmmm.....yeah....I remain unconvinced.  What I think DCS has got very right are sounds and throttle response.  The rest? Not so much.....

 

BoX has a much, much better WWII A2A offering. DCS doesn't compare. The DM, the effects, the atmospherics, the fluidity, the diversity of planes, It's all in the BoX camp. It's not that BoX is twice as good as DCS in the WWII A2A - it's five-times as good. My opinion anyway. 

 

For the A2G I think DCS has it simply because the player can build better custom scenarios much faster and much easier. In A2A the sky is the sky, so to speak, so maybe cookie cutter scenarios can still have a lot of variety depending simply on how the player wants to approach the flight. In A2G, you want to take advantage of the different ground objects and buildings and terrain, and DCS is better at that. You can build A2G missions in DCS in minutes that would require a degree in physics from Hogwarts to do in the BoX ME. I've used the DCS ME more in one day than I used the BoX ME in all of 2020. And it's all about building good A2G scenarios. Lots of variety and lots of beeg badabooms!

 

As for the Channel map, it's simply the best WWII map I've ever seen. I bought and retuned the Normandy map, which was horrible. I bought it again after the update and its okay now. The Channel map is freaking great right from the start. I like Crash' take. 

 

 

 

[Robli]

I don't want to sound too patronizing, but some of the things I read here make me feel like I have tried a totally different sim. For example this better WWII single player in DCS? I find it totally opposite. Once I have learned the various systems of a WWII bird, there is really not much to do with it. No campaigns or careers and not that many interesting missions. This is not meant as an aim at anybody or trying to patronize, just interesting how different perception people can have about the same thing. Currently, for me, the lack of meaningful content is one of the biggest weaknesses of the WWII side of DCS.

[DD_Arthur]

53 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

For the A2G I think DCS has it simply because the player can build better custom scenarios much faster and much easier. In A2A the sky is the sky, so to speak, so maybe cookie cutter scenarios can still have a lot of variety depending simply on how the player wants to approach the flight. In A2G, you want to take advantage of the different ground objects and buildings and terrain, and DCS is better at that. You can build A2G missions in DCS in minutes that would require a degree in physics from Hogwarts to do in the BoX ME. I've used the DCS ME more in one day than I used the BoX ME in all of 2020. And it's all about building good A2G scenarios. Lots of variety and lots of beeg badabooms!

 

I have neither the time, inclination nor, I suspect, the intellect to swallow the GBS mission builder.  Luckily, I'm a member of a squad which contains much cleverer and more dedicated people than yours truly.

 

  I disagree with you about A2A and A2G in DCS.  In DCS I feel you can create both types of mission equally well.  Or rather, I can create missions equally well.  This video was my DCS epiphany.  After I'd watched this everything was...."Ahhhh, I get it!"

 

 

So for me i can enjoy the badaboom but also the "Fox two!"  Whoosh, splat, splash

 

[Rei-sen]

1 hour ago, DD_Arthur said:

DCS Normandy map which is still horrible as far as I'm concerned

Would you care to elaborate? What is it exactly horrible about this map?

[DD_Arthur]

1 minute ago, Arthur-A said:

Would you care to elaborate? What is it exactly horrible about this map?

 

For me, it still looks grim and performs woefully compared to other DCS maps in both 2D and VR.

[CanadaOne]

10 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

 

I have neither the time, inclination nor, I suspect, the intellect to swallow the GBS mission builder.  Luckily, I'm a member of a squad which contains much cleverer and more dedicated people than yours truly.

 

  I disagree with you about A2A and A2G in DCS.  In DCS I feel you can create both types of mission equally well.  Or rather, I can create missions equally well.  This video was my DCS epiphany.  After I'd watched this everything was...."Ahhhh, I get it!"

 

 

So for me i can enjoy the badaboom but also the "Fox two!"  Whoosh, splat, splash

 

 

You're right about DCS A2A. I was referring to WWII stuff only. And I'm not any kind of authority on A2A mission building. 99% of my missions are A2G.

 

As for the BoX ME. I think Jason said in an interview that it was a developer's tool, and I have no interest in writing code, so I'll stick with the infinitely more user friendly DCS ME.

[Lusekofte]

2 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

I remain totally unconvinced by the WW2 offering.

This is something I can agree upon, compared with BOX it will never meet the standard when it comes to wargames , but it can eventually be a masterpiece  in campaigns

[marcost]

My critical tests as a strictly SP:

 

1) Both sims make me feel like I'm flying

 

2) DCS maps makes me want to fly 'over there' to see what is there, Il2 does not

 

3) Il2 feels like a war is going on in 194x, DCS does not

 

4) DCS AI makes me feel like I need to watch my six, IL2 does not 

 

Regards,

 

M

Edited January 2, 2021 by marcost