DCS

[Lusekofte]

13 minutes ago, marcost said:

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

That was a nice sum up , I believe not flying online much affect my gravitation a lot to DCS. I am sure it would have been opposite if I liked online flying

[DBFlyguy]

1 hour ago, marcost said:

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

 

Definitely agree with these observations, with a few of my own to add:

 

• There is definitely more detail by a mile put into the maps in DCS, they are BEAUTIFUL.  The Channel map is absolutely gorgeous.  Unfortunately, its not optimized at all and run like absolute garbage.  The IL-2 maps still have a generic feel to them... Kuban is really good but I feel like a lot more work should've gone into the Bodenplatte map.  I hope the Normandy map is massive improvement especially since there is direct competition with the DCS version.  Maps aside, I prefer the overall look of IL2. It continues to improve with each update and the care into small details like time period appropriate pilot models are nice touches which I really appreciate as a WWII aviation history buff by comparison the pilot models in the DCS WWII are pretty poor, especially the P-51 pilot model
• IL2 definitely feels more like an immersive WWII air combat sim.  DCS WWII feels like a modern combat sim that lets you fly a couple WWII aircraft.  DCS WWII just isn't believable in its current state... the radio calls really break immersion, there is literally nothing to do unless you build your own missions or buy one of the canned payware campaigns that is likely to break in some form or fashion with one of the "patches".
• The updated dogfight AI in DCS is currently light years ahead of what we currently have in IL2.  Calling the friendly AI in IL2 incompetent is putting it lightly.... they have no ability to hit anything and get blown out of the sky with annoying regularity.  I don't notice any difference no matter what you put their skill level to.  The enemy AI has gotten somewhat better where they actually use the vertical from time to time but there still is too many instances of that long never ending turn in one direction then reverse and go into a turn in other direction.  the AI needs major improving (ie overhaul) in IL2. 
• The VR experience in IL2 is a lot more immersive and enjoyable for me.  I get solid and consistent frames including in larger air battles.  DCS is...well, DCS... it hasn't been optimized to run anything properly.  It looks cool but runs like crap, even FS2020 in its current state is a much more enjoyable VR experience over DCS.
• Despite my current issues with IL2 like those mentioned above... I would never in a million years suggest the current offerings of DCS WWII over IL2.  The price of entry alone into what I see as a fairly subpar WWII experience is frankly just too high, even during a sale for DCS WWII.  Making people buy a separate "assets pack" just to get some era appropriate AI units is a joke! Same thoughts for the separate maps...Oh and that pointless I-16 module ? what the actual hell was the point of that thing...it doesn't fit into any scenario with anything else currently available in DCS.  DCS WWII has no consistent plan or vision that I can get behind.

Edited January 2, 2021 by DBFlyguy

[dburne]

Yeah I use DCS for my craving for more modern jets and helicopters.

WWII I use IL-2 GB all the way, and WWII is my first love.

Edited January 2, 2021 by dburne

[CanadaOne]

36 minutes ago, DBFlyguy said:

 

Definitely agree with these observations, with a few of my own to add:

 

There is definitely more detail by a mile put into the maps in DCS, they are BEAUTIFUL.  The Channel map is absolutely gorgeous.  Unfortunately, its not optimized at all and run like absolute garbage.

 

Fortunately I don't have that experience. But I also have 32GB RAM which I'm sure helps a good deal. And I play with the settings a bit to get the FPS I'm comfortable with, but I can absolutely balance out the settings with my expectations and have a beautiful looking flight.

 

 

36 minutes ago, DBFlyguy said:

 

Despite my current issues with IL2 like those mentioned above... I would never in a million years suggest the current offerings of DCS WWII over IL2.  The price of entry alone into what I see as a fairly subpar WWII experience is frankly just too high, even during a sale for DCS WWII.  Making people buy a separate "assets pack" just to get some era appropriate AI units is a joke! Same thoughts for the separate maps...Oh and that pointless I-16 module ? what the actual hell was the point of that thing...it doesn't fit into any scenario with anything else currently available in DCS.  DCS WWII has no consistent plan or vision that I can get behind.

 

 

There's an apples and oranges thing going on here, I think. IL2 offers, for lack of a better term, a cohesive complete package. You get the peanut butter and jelly and crackers and a little plastic knife all in one box you can bring with you and you don't need anything else. And I'm not knocking it. IL2 is a great flightsim. I've been flying IL2 products for 20 years.

 

DCS is a big sandwich board covered in ingredients. You pick what you want and what you do with it is your business. It's much more of a flightsim sandbox than IL2. And it also offers much higher quality planes and maps than IL2 does. I heard the F-18 development budget alone was more than a million dollars and the manual, when all is said and done, will run 500+ pages. It's a whole other thing compared to what IL2 offers. And I guess by necessity that means if you want WWII assets, which not everyone does in a sim that features mostly modern jets, well ya gotta shell out a few bucks. 

 

IL2 is dinner brought to you. DCS is a buffet where you serve yourself. 

 

I want some cookies all of a sudden.... 

[dburne]

29 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

Fortunately I don't have that experience. But I also have 32GB RAM which I'm sure helps a good deal. And I play with the settings a bit to get the FPS I'm comfortable with, but I can absolutely balance out the settings with my expectations and have a beautiful looking flight.

 

 

 

 

There's an apples and oranges thing going on here, I think. IL2 offers, for lack of a better term, a cohesive complete package. You get the peanut butter and jelly and crackers and a little plastic knife all in one box you can bring with you and you don't need anything else. And I'm not knocking it. IL2 is a great flightsim. I've been flying IL2 products for 20 years.

 

DCS is a big sandwich board covered in ingredients. You pick what you want and what you do with it is your business. It's much more of a flightsim sandbox than IL2. And it also offers much higher quality planes and maps than IL2 does. I heard the F-18 development budget alone was more than a million dollars and the manual, when all is said and done, will run 500+ pages. It's a whole other thing compared to what IL2 offers. And I guess by necessity that means if you want WWII assets, which not everyone does in a sim that features mostly modern jets, well ya gotta shell out a few bucks. 

 

IL2 is dinner brought to you. DCS is a buffet where you serve yourself. 

 

I want some cookies all of a sudden.... 

 

Yeah and after this pandemic I am afraid buffets are going the way of the Tookie bird.

Shame really as I have been known to enjoy them, but would certainly help my diet if they did.

[DBFlyguy]

51 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

Fortunately I don't have that experience. But I also have 32GB RAM which I'm sure helps a good deal. And I play with the settings a bit to get the FPS I'm comfortable with, but I can absolutely balance out the settings with my expectations and have a beautiful looking flight.

 

 

 

I've got 32GB too and between the three sims I currently use the most (IL2, DCS and FS2020) Only DCS consistently gives issues.  Its DCS, not my setup.

54 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

 

IL2 is dinner brought to you. DCS is a buffet where you serve yourself. 

 

 

 

The buffet is also a hotbed for germs and bacteria...seems appropriate for the DCS ?  Don't get me wrong, I enjoy my modern stuff (Hornet, Harrier, M2K etc) we've got no other options in that market besides BMS, just looking at WWII stuff, the only major things I feel DCS has over IL2 currently are better detailed maps, sound design, AI logic and that AI B-17 (Come on Jason... give us some AI 4 engine bombers aircraft to escort...SERIOUSLY!!!! ?)

[CanadaOne]

1 minute ago, DBFlyguy said:

 

I've got 32GB too and between the three sims I currently use the most (IL2, DCS and FS2020) Only DCS consistently gives issues.  Its DCS, not my setup.

 

I can't answer for your performance issues - ooohhh, that didn't sound nice  - but I have decent rig I think, 3700X/32RAM/2060 Super with DCS on a dedicated M.2 drive and DCS runs very nicely at 1080P. I enjoy my flights and they look great. 

 

1 minute ago, DBFlyguy said:

The buffet is also a hotbed for germs and bacteria...seems appropriate for the DCS ?  Don't get me wrong, I enjoy my modern stuff (Hornet, Harrier, M2K etc) we've got no other options in that market besides BMS, just looking at WWII stuff, the only major things I feel DCS has over IL2 currently are better detailed maps, sound design, AI logic and that AI B-17 (Come on Jason... give us some AI 4 engine bombers aircraft to escort...SERIOUSLY!!!! ?)

 

DCS WWII is definitely a work in progress. And an expensive one at that. I don't see the DCS WWII option as being inherently cohesive the way IL2 is; it's the sandbox way of doing things. Pick the pieces you want and do as you see fit. It's both a limitation and a selling point. Depends what you like. I have a buddy who still flies IL2-46 because he has one and only one flightsim priority: Flying P-47s in the Pacific. He doesn't care about anything else. He builds his missions, he makes his skins, and he really enjoys his flights. DCS is kind of tuned for that kind of "do your own thing" flying. There is structured and there is sandbox. DCS is definitely sandbox.

 

Here's an advantage to the sandbox approach: we will have a high-fidelity DCS Mosquito long before we have a low-fidelity IL2 Mosquito. And there is a very strong possibility that we will get DCS carrier action in the Pacific long, long before we get it in Il2. Granted the DCS products will be buffet style (and $$$) and not part of a cohesive package, but then a lot of people don't care. That will be evidenced shortly by the DCS Mosquito selling like mad! to hordes of flyers who can't wait to get their grubby mitts on it. And when the DCS carrier and Corsair come out, they will also sell like crazy. Because a lot of people don't need a complete package, and certainly don't want to wait for it, they just want some good flightsim toys and they'll figure out what to do with them.

[DBFlyguy]

9 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

I can't answer for your performance issues - ooohhh, that didn't sound nice 

LOL Well played sir!

11 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

 

DCS WWII is definitely a work in progress. And an expensive one at that. I don't see the DCS WWII option as being inherently cohesive the way IL2 is; it's the sandbox way of doing things. Pick the pieces you want and do as you see fit. It's both a limitation and a selling point. Depends what you like. I have a buddy who still flies IL2-46 because he has one and only one flightsim priority: Flying P-47s in the Pacific. He doesn't care about anything else. He builds his missions, he makes his skins, and he really enjoys his flights. DCS is kind of tuned for that kind of "do your own thing" flying. There is structured and there is sandbox. DCS is definitely sandbox.

 

Here's an advantage to the sandbox approach: we will have a high-fidelity DCS Mosquito long before we have a low-fidelity IL2 Mosquito. And there is a very strong possibility that we will get DCS carrier action in the Pacific long, long before we get it in Il2. Granted the DCS products will be buffet style (and $$$) and not part of a cohesive package, but then a lot of people don't care. That will be evidenced shortly by the DCS Mosquito selling like mad! to hordes of flyers who can't wait to get their grubby mitts on it. And when the DCS carrier and Corsair come out, they will also sell like crazy. Because a lot of people don't need a complete package, and certainly don't want to wait for it, they just want some good flightsim toys and they'll figure out what to do with them.

 

I definitely understand where your friend is coming from, I'm planning on reinstalling 1946 soon.  I miss being able to fly in the pacific and none of the upcoming stuff for either IL2 or DCS is honestly gonna match what 1946 brought, especially with the current mods out there.

 

Speaking of the Mossie, the DCS one looks really tempting but I'll wait for the IL2 version.  If DCS drops a massively expanded and FREE assets pack including a lot more AI aircraft, vehicles and ships, I "may" consider it then, maybe.

[IamRed1jfranchi]

12 hours 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.....

Re: Normandy Map in DCS. You should check out this Terrain Texture MOD: (GTM:Normandy by Barthek) It does a fantastic job of correcting the "cartoonish colors" and gives a more natural look.

I am very impressed with IL2 Great Battles graphics and performance. I am just happy that IL2 GB exists because there are days when my brain needs a switch from the DCS Platform. 

DCS hangs or crashes 10 or 20 times more than IL2 if it ever does.. LoL.. 

[Jade_Monkey]

6 hours ago, marcost said:

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

 

I think it has changed a lot within the last two months, and the AI can give you a run you your money.

The IL2 AI is not stuck turning like it used to, it uses the vertical space a lot more now and they have been making many more frontal attacks and deflection shots.

 

If you havent truly tried it recently I would recommend setting up a 8x8 QM and seeing the new dogfight AI. 

[DBFlyguy]

18 minutes ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

I think it has changed a lot within the last two months, and the AI can give you a run you your money.

The IL2 AI is not stuck turning like it used to, it uses the vertical space a lot more now and they have been making many more frontal attacks and deflection shots.

 

If you havent truly tried it recently I would recommend setting up a 8x8 QM and seeing the new dogfight AI. 

 

I just did, and the IL2 AI is HORRIBLE, specifically the friendly AI.  I set up a few flights that had 7 friendly AI (3 P-51s and 4 P-47D-28s) all set to ACE vs 1 BF109G6 Late set to NOVICE...and I just watched what unfolded....guess which side took loses and which side got away unscathed....  ?

 

At this point, I'd be perfectly ok if we didn't get any new updates for a few months until the AI is seriously revamped across the board, this is bad, really really bad.

Edited January 3, 2021 by DBFlyguy

[Jade_Monkey]

8 minutes ago, DBFlyguy said:

 

I just did, and the IL2 AI is HORRIBLE, specifically the friendly AI.  I set up a few flights that had 7 friendly AI (3 P-51s and 4 P-47D-28s) all set to ACE vs 1 BF109G6 Late set to NOVICE...and I just watched what unfolded....guess which side took loses and which side got away unscathed....  ?

 

At this point, I'd be perfectly ok if we didn't get any new updates for a few months until the AI is seriously revamped across the board, this is bad, really really bad.

 

I just performed that test: 7 veteran p-47 and p-51 vs 1 novice 109.

 

The result was as predictable as they come, after some tight turning the 109 gets shot down and peppered by mutiple planes from all directions without inflicting any damages to allied planes.

[Creep]

13 minutes ago, DBFlyguy said:

 

I just did, and the IL2 AI is HORRIBLE, specifically the friendly AI.  I set up a few flights that had 7 friendly AI (3 P-51s and 4 P-47D-28s) all set to ACE vs 1 BF109G6 Late set to NOVICE...and I just watched what unfolded....guess which side took loses and which side got away unscathed....  ?

 

At this point, I'd be perfectly ok if we didn't get any new updates for a few months until the AI is seriously revamped across the board, this is bad, really really bad.

 

there is a very simple solution to this: fly against humans online

[DBFlyguy]

42 minutes ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

I just performed that test: 7 veteran p-47 and p-51 vs 1 novice 109.

 

The result was as predictable as they come, after some tight turning the 109 gets shot down and peppered by mutiple planes from all directions without inflicting any damages to allied planes.

 

Just ran a few more test missions, 7 aces (friendly) versus 1 novice (enemy).  The novice managed to get in several head on passes while being chased by muliple friendly before finally being taken down including getting at least 1 guns kill and a maneuver kill against the friendly on 3 of the 4 test runs.  Yes, they eventually shoot down the 1 novice but it takes forever.... If I even the playing field and add more aircraft to the enemy side, regardless of the skill level, the friendly AI consistently get slaughtered. 

40 minutes ago, QB.Creep said:

 

there is a very simple solution to this: fly against humans online

That is not a solution.  That's ignoring the issue.

Edited January 3, 2021 by DBFlyguy

[marcost]

5 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

I think it has changed a lot within the last two months, and the AI can give you a run you your money.

The IL2 AI is not stuck turning like it used to, it uses the vertical space a lot more now and they have been making many more frontal attacks and deflection shots.

 

If you havent truly tried it recently I would recommend setting up a 8x8 QM and seeing the new dogfight AI. 

 

Hi Jade_Monkey,

 

I must agree the AI is getting better and I do actually fly campaigns now whereas previously I lost interest after a couple of missions. Still don't really feel threatened though like in 1946 or to some degree DCS.

 

IL2 GB is definitely nearer the finished line for me and graphics, performance and AI improvements keep rolling in. Long may the improvements continue!

 

Regards,

 

M

[simfan2015]

Thank you all for these assessment of both il-2 and DCS. This sure is very valuable information for anyone trying to decide on one, or the other or... Both! Although I like DCS very much I, personally, always have the feeling I am fighting the game itself, far more than the enemy. Of course I am looking forward to the mossie and corsair too and as always... won't resist to buy those DCS modules on day 1. However, I keep returning to il-2 since that fine day I first installed it, simply because it is the only modern day sim/game that indeed gives one the impression to return in time and fight those fearful enemies in WWII and WW I. I hate being shot down over Normandy in a spit in 1944 by... a DCS F14B ! ?

Edited January 3, 2021 by simfan2015

[BOO]

8 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

 

will have a high-fidelity DCS Mosquito long before we have a low-fidelity IL2 Mosquito. 

 

I dont know about "long"

 

 

 

 

[Lusekofte]

10 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

can't answer for your performance issues - ooohhh, that didn't sound nice  - but I have decent rig I think, 3700X/32RAM/2060 Super with DCS on a dedicated M.2 drive and DCS runs very nicely at 1080P. I enjoy my flights and they look great. 

After latest patch I feel GB and DCS run the same. 

GB is no longer easy on the Rig 

I believe the full implementation of 4 k textures have improved but slowed down the game. 

I am no longer satisfied with my rigs performance, in GB.  If anything I feel DCS run smoother now, looks better can have a lot more going on and still run better. On my rig. 

GB alone the way I use it do not justify an upgrade. But they all have a tendency to scratch any itch I get about flying. 

[Pekka_Rayha]

Good conversation. Although I have to disagree with the thought that DCS WWII is good at offline only. Storm of War server does great job of immersive online fights. Campaigns are based on real dates etc. and there seems to be good community with pretty nice number of players. And you can operate perfectly alone too, even take an AI wingman with you. Thought has been put to please players that have tendency to play more offline. 

 

I have to add it looks just amazing, the lighting and textures, canopy scratches, even in VR. And even/especially with some Abba. 

 

(Not my video.) 

Edited January 3, 2021 by Pekka_Rayha

[CanadaOne]

3 hours ago, BOO said:

 

I dont know about "long"

 

 

We'll have to see. But as there were strong suggestions the DCS Mosquito would come out before Christmas, and obviously didn't, I think we're going to see it this month. 

 

If the BoX Mosquito is out by July I'd be surprised. Also, the BoX Mosquito isn't a collector plane. That means I have to buy BoN - which I don't plan on doing - for about $110Cdn. I'll get the high-fidelity DCS Mosquito, sooner, for less.

[Lusekofte]

4 hours ago, BOO said:

 

I dont know about "long"

 

 

 

 

They have been cooking up modules in a faster phase. Question is more on what state

[Bremspropeller]

17 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

I'll get the high-fidelity DCS Mosquito, sooner, for less.

 

Yeah, but that's about all you'll get.

 

Want a fitting map? Need to buy it extra.

And it gets really interesting, trying to find any fitting airplanes or targets to fly with or against.

[CanadaOne]

2 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

Yeah, but that's about all you'll get.

 

Want a fitting map? Need to buy it extra.

And it gets really interesting, trying to find any fitting airplanes or targets to fly with or against.

 

I got all the maps! 

 

Targets? Too many to count. I can build 101 A2G missions in the DCS ME and then build 101 more. Finding stuff to blow up ain't a problem. 

Edited January 3, 2021 by CanadaOne
Because!

[[DBS]TH0R]

Picked up The Channel map, and few campaigns. They have set the bar high for that map / area, I do hope 1C follows or exceeds it with BON.

 

Skipped Syria for now until I get a new rig with faster CPU and more than 16 GB RAM...

Edited January 3, 2021 by [DBS]TH0R

[sevenless]

17 hours ago, DBFlyguy said:

DCS WWII has no consistent plan or vision that I can get behind.

 

That pretty much sums it up for me. Though I enjoy the landscape flying over Normandy or UK in the new Channel map with the various WW2 planes, the complete lack of any career mode reduces the practical value greatly. With regards to map design, however, DCS is lightyears ahead of what BoX has to offer.

[Lusekofte]

15 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

Skipped Syria for now until I get a new rig with faster CPU and more than 16 GB RAM...

In my rig Syria run smoother than Channel map. 

 

9 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

That pretty much sums it up for me.

I think anyone into DCS use it for what it is. It provide believable wargames and excellent campaigns more alive than any in GB. But you need to look at it differently than GB. Like everything else the ? do not fit everyone. And that is ok, I would not enjoy any sim , if it was not for die hard fans of them,  I am not such a guy,, I come along now and then happily and enjoy the fiesta made by others

Edited January 3, 2021 by 216th_LuseKofte

[[DBS]TH0R]

2 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

In my rig Syria run smoother than Channel map.

 

How much RAM you got?

[Lusekofte]

28 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

How much RAM you got?

32 

[[DBS]TH0R]

That is why The Channel runs better on my rig with 16 GB.

 

When I upgrade and there are campaigns featuring this map - I will add it to my stable. Until then, The Channel features a bucket load of instant missions for WWII birds that alone are worth it for me since those are the planes I fly the most in DCS.

[BOO]

2 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

In my rig Syria run smoother than Channel map. 

 

Bricks in Tumble Dryer run smoother than the Channel Map. 

4 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

 

We'll have to see. But as there were strong suggestions the DCS Mosquito would come out before Christmas, and obviously didn't, I think we're going to see it this month. 

 

If the BoX Mosquito is out by July I'd be surprised. Also, the BoX Mosquito isn't a collector plane. That means I have to buy BoN - which I don't plan on doing - for about $110Cdn. I'll get the high-fidelity DCS Mosquito, sooner, for less.

A fair point well made old boy

[CanadaOne]

8 minutes ago, BOO said:

Bricks in Tumble Dryer run smoother than the Channel Map. 

A fair point well made old boy

 

If BoX ups their game regarding SP content creation, I'll buy BoN. But if it's the same ridiculous ME and the same same weak QMB, not a chance. 

 

Mind you, I really do need a fourth 190 and a ninth 109. Hard to believe I've lived this long without them. 

[Rei-sen]

About performance on monitor. My rig is in the signature. I run DCS with almost maxed out settings. I fly SP campaigns with a huge numbers of aircraft and ground vehicles (2 of them on a Normandy map). The performance is great overall. There is occasional stutter or two, but nothing terrible. Most of the time it runs smooth. And hey, the time acceleration works great up to x8! So I can skip long boring flights. And I was surprised when I flew low level over some big cities on Normandy map and didn't notice any FPS drop!

 

I run box with maxed out graphics(except for clouds that set to high). It doesn't run smooth, I get constant stutters. Low level flying above cities on Rheinland map is terrible even in Quick Mission with no other aircraft. When I try to fly some campaigns it's even worse. Time acceleration is not working, so there's no way to skip long boring flights. Sometimes even 1x time is more like 0.85x. So on rare occasions when I feel like I want to play box I usually quit this game after first 5 mins. It performs terribly. Lowering graphics settings? I mean, it looks meh even on maxed out settings. Especially the ground. Why would I want to make it look even worse?

Edited January 3, 2021 by Arthur-A

[Creep]

16 hours ago, DBFlyguy said:

That is not a solution.  That's ignoring the issue.

The concern is that the AI is not very sophisticated, yes? Humans are - fly against them. 

[BOO]

29 minutes ago, QB.Creep said:

The concern is that the AI is not very sophisticated, yes? Humans are - fly against them. 

Getting squad gang banged or vuched by some twonk on MP flying the last word in uber machines is every bit as annoying as dumb AI. 

MP is not the be all and end all solution for the vast majority who prefer their flights free of chat boxes and "aces" gaming the map. 

I flew MP for 5 years - its why I now fly SP. 

 

[AndyJWest]

1 hour ago, QB.Creep said:

The concern is that the AI is not very sophisticated, yes? Humans are - fly against them. 

 

Most (but not all) humans are capable of being sophisticated. Unfortunately, they are also capable of being a great number of other things too. Including some I've seen rather too often in multiplayer. Which is one reason (though perhaps not the primary one) why I don't do it anymore.

 

If people have the opportunity (which not all do, for a variety of reasons), I'd recommend giving multiplayer a go, once they have achieved a reasonable degree of competence. So they can then make the best judgement, based on their personal wants, and on how it goes for them, as to whether they prefer MP or SP, or indeed a mix of the two. Neither is inherently 'better', and accordingly it comes down to personal choice. Their own choice, and not one imposed by others who think that they are better imaginary-pilots just because they chase each other around the make-believe map.

 

We are doing this for fun, not to prove something-or-other concerning personal competence in an inevitably-inaccurate recreation of events taking place before we were born.

[CanadaOne]

2 hours ago, BOO said:

Getting squad gang banged or vuched by some twonk on MP flying the last word in uber machines is every bit as annoying as dumb AI. 

MP is not the be all and end all solution for the vast majority who prefer their flights free of chat boxes and "aces" gaming the map. 

I flew MP for 5 years - its why I now fly SP. 

 

 

Can't you arrange a flight for people who aren't twonks? There must be some place where non-dickheads can fly for fun and don't try to spoil it for others.

[DD_fruitbat]

2 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

 

Can't you arrange a flight for people who aren't twonks? There must be some place where non-dickheads can fly for fun and don't try to spoil it for others.

 

They're called squads......

Edited January 4, 2021 by DD_fruitbat

[CanadaOne]

Just now, DD_fruitbat said:

 

There called squads......

 

If you can join a squad that pretty much solves the dickhead part of it, I guess. Or does it end up being squad against squad and the other guys are dickheads sometimes?

[Lusekofte]

5 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

If BoX ups their game regarding SP

Well. If you buy BON, you are houndreds of thousands % more chance to get to fly  Mossie. 

Based on what I heard and this is said by many many other people. Your selection of purchase is not right. It is not fair. I won and many many other people said it too. There is a million more reasons for me being right, many many  people say this too, just ask them. 

Edited January 4, 2021 by 216th_LuseKofte

[Creep]

3 hours ago, BOO said:

Getting squad gang banged or vuched by some twonk on MP flying the last word in uber machines is every bit as annoying as dumb AI. 

MP is not the be all and end all solution for the vast majority who prefer their flights free of chat boxes and "aces" gaming the map. 

I flew MP for 5 years - its why I now fly SP. 

 

 

2 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

 

Most (but not all) humans are capable of being sophisticated. Unfortunately, they are also capable of being a great number of other things too. Including some I've seen rather too often in multiplayer. Which is one reason (though perhaps not the primary one) why I don't do it anymore.

 

If people have the opportunity (which not all do, for a variety of reasons), I'd recommend giving multiplayer a go, once they have achieved a reasonable degree of competence. So they can then make the best judgement, based on their personal wants, and on how it goes for them, as to whether they prefer MP or SP, or indeed a mix of the two. Neither is inherently 'better', and accordingly it comes down to personal choice. Their own choice, and not one imposed by others who think that they are better imaginary-pilots just because they chase each other around the make-believe map.

 

We are doing this for fun, not to prove something-or-other concerning personal competence in an inevitably-inaccurate recreation of events taking place before we were born.

In every game I have ever played, the computer is only capable of presenting a limited challenge. It's scripted to perform certain actions in specific situations, so there are patterns. Once you learn those patterns, you can exploit them, and the computer cannot improvise like a human can. 

 

All I'm saying is that the path you're on is a dead-end - AI in flight sims is either broken (can do things you cannot do) or is dumb as a rock. I haven't seen any middle ground. But to each his own - hopefully the dev team can improve the AI - I just think it will take a tremendous amount of time and energy to accomplish it.

Edited January 4, 2021 by QB.Creep
typo