DCS

[Original_Uwe]

Sooooooooooooooo in for Normandy and the extras pack, but it needs more Thunderbolt!

[BeastyBaiter]

As of late last year, they claimed Q1 2017 for the Harrier. I don't think there is any chance of that happening but they do seem to be on track for release sometime this year.

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

The setup is as follows:

1) Map + assets: $60

2) Map only: $45

3) Assets only: $30

 

The assets only kinda make sense even if overpriced, since a lot of us are using NTTR as generic desert map #1 but Normandy by itself strikes me as an odd option.

 

In more interesting DCS news, Leatherneck broke into two teams (amicably they claim). The old Leatherneck (guys who made the MiG-21) will keep the name and ownership of the MiG-21. The new splinter team, called Heatblur, is lead by Cobra and own both the AJS-37 and the upcoming F-14. I think LNS have the F4U project but I'm not sure on that. Links to relevant posts below.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3076083#post3076083

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3076159#post3076159

Sweet I'll get Map and assets! Plus the planes..the need to hurry up with that Jug!

[JG5_Zesphr]

I think the jug is put on hold until they find more info about it

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

So Leatherneck Simulations just split into two companies : MAGNITUDE 3 LLC and Heatblur Simulations. First is staying with MiG-21 and God knows what they are up to, second takes all the newest goodies - Viggen and Tomcat. 

All this 3rd party business is so unprofessional, they split, join, leave, change ... 

[Lusekofte]

Stuka has not much to do in Normandy 1944 - is not 1940 B of B anymore.

 

At this point we should forget about historical reasons to have or not to have. The two German planes we have did not fight over Normandy either.

P 51 did go as a fighter bomber some types of spits also did this inclusive Norwegian 331 squadron, they had  Spitfire Mk. IX LF until Juli 44 and these was replaced with Mk. IXb.

 

Admittingly the Stuka crews had for the most part died or transferred to FW 190´s . I hope even for a sluggish DO 217 K  Even if it would not have survivability 

Edited March 11, 2017 by 216th_LuseKofte

[Finkeren]

All this 3rd party business is so unprofessional, they split, join, leave, change ...

3rd party developers can do great stuff, but one should not rely on them to create core content.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Well, so far none made any core content. Most of them barely can keep up with modules. 

 

Also, this more and more looks like Cobra basically dumped LN. Took modules that generate or will generate most cash flow in near future and that are most complete or up to be released along with most of the stuff while leaving old crew with still bugged MiG-21. Dolphin from Magnitude3/LN is saying they are restructuring their forums and some update/news will come next week, but for now all is certain, is that Corsair is on track. Iwo-Jima and later Okinawa not really though since they lack resources/manpower. 

[Lusekofte]

 

 

Well, so far none made any core content. Most of them barely can keep up with modules. 

 

The Huey, Gazelle, MI 8 and countless others have been a success, no need for this negative attitude. 3 parties is a very good idea in DCS, without them we would not have had any planes other than K 50 , A 10 C and FC3

 

It is the inconsistency , the plane chosen and never a timeframe complete that is the problem, not the modules them selves. The WW 2 modules are in fact pieces of art not seen anywhere else in terms of complexity , I just do not fancy the fighters myself 

[Beazil]

Well, the trailer looks pretty darn good, I'll say that.  I sincerely hope this project is a success.  To me, DCS has missed as far as producing a viable theatre for the mismatched world war II birds they have released so far, but that is one beautiful map, and those ground forces are very impressive to see.

 

I hope it all comes together in a solid product that adds to the variety of simulations out there, and compliments the il2 BOX product line, even if it was never meant to.  Competition is good.  And so is recognizing what your product does well, and not competing so directly with other developers in a niche market.

 

For the first time in a while, I'm actually looking forward to more development on this project.  I wish them luck and success.

 

Is it just me, or is it a great time to be a flight simmer?  

[Original_Uwe]

I can't believe there are people that bitch about having many and varied companies creating content?

That's capitalism folks. Centralized control sucks.

[Gambit21]

I can't believe there are people that bitch about having many and varied companies creating content?

 

 

Those comments are made within a specif context and reality of what is actually going down...and not going down.

Fairly obvious if you read the thread.

[Original_Uwe]

It's still asinine.

More companies working on more content is a good thing.

[Sokol1]

Funny is: If DCS follow NTTR sales model and put only Normandy 1944+Assest for 60$ (NTTR price) all will be happy (BTW - that "famous" ED moderator say that NTTR sell surprisingly well), but no, give more buy options and "the sky is falling".

 

The MP community always divides by itself, with their N "All Arcade Full Icons", "Fast Food Fast Dogfight", "Hardcore Hardhead Battles", etc, servers. Will be divided more? Yes, but no news there.

[JG4_Sputnik]

that "famous" ED moderator say that NTTR sell surprisingly well)

 

Great to hear! Do you have a link for that?

[Blutaar]

Well i paid, its now what 350$ for a game that i never play that much, im waiting for the new  caucasus terrain to redo the KA50 campaign, the only Module i learned so far hehe.

 

I think they want to much money for there modules but i am no Flightsim producer so i not really know but that pricewall is sure a hinderance for new people getting in to the Flighsim genre.

 

IL2 BoX on the other hand does it right, they charge not to much, its a good price even without sales.

 

I like DCS and will continue to support them, the WW2 scenario looks great, such a beautiful map and i hope they bring good planes from different time periods like IL2 BoX do so we can have different campaigns.

[Thad]

At this point we should forget about historical reasons to have or not to have. The two German planes we have did not fight over Normandy either.

P 51 did go as a fighter bomber some types of spits also did this inclusive Norwegian 331 squadron, they had  Spitfire Mk. IX LF until Juli 44 and these was replaced with Mk. IXb.

 

Admittingly the Stuka crews had for the most part died or transferred to FW 190´s . I hope even for a sluggish DO 217 K  Even if it would not have survivability 

"The two German planes we have did not fight over Normandy either." Good point. This seems to indicate a lack of production control or foresight. That's assuming they knew or thought about the development of the upcoming Normandy map and WWII modules.

[BeastyBaiter]

ED took over the project from a 3rd party, they are merely making what was promised. But you're right, someone wasn't thinking when they came up with that list of aircraft and the map for them. The full plan off the top of my head is: P-51D, Spitfire IX, P-47D of some flavor, Bf-109K4, Fw-190D9, Me-262 and Normandy map. All those aircraft did face each other, just not over the Normandy map. The German bias was strong with the person who came up with this plan.

 

On the more modern side of things, most of the added aircraft do fit late cold war and post cold war scenarios. It's only a few outliers like the F-86, MiG-15 and AJS-37 that don't. The biggest issue is the lack of eastern planes. Everyone is making a bunch of western planes but the MiG-21, L-39 and FC3 are the only fixed wing eastern options. The helicopter side is a little more even and looks to remain so, but even that has issues (attack choppers vs light scouts).

[Sokol1]

The German bias was strong with the person who came up with this plan.

 

Well, the guy that start the Kickstarter was desperate to stay in the market and knew that these last model aircraft would appeal/please that famous "1946 Luftwhiner"...

And things are showing that today many players don't care if are using Mig-15 against I-15, or Fw190 over Stalingrad  (some even ask for Zero and Wildcat there) or Bf 109K-4/Me 262 over Normandy D-day to not mention that DCSW jets "salad" over Nevada. 

Edited March 12, 2017 by Sokol1

[Gambit21]

It's still asinine.

More companies working on more content is a good thing.

 

It's a better thing if those "companies" are directed in such a way that a cohesive final product is produced in a reasonable amount of time.

[ZachariasX]

I really, really like the Nevada map. Online or not, I find campaigns made as red flag exercises more appealing than bombing some place I wouldn't much care for over an invented (as if there were not enough real ones ) war. besides, Not since Falcon 4.0 we had a good attempt of making a campaign of that sort. BoS campaigns are much easier to make, as you take part in events that took place and that you as an individual cannot change, no matter what you do (realistically). So the scripted timeline is good for that. But not the usual "you bomb my peasants, I bomb your peasants" wars that we fight for ulterior motives of today. Those are no sports, just ugly.

 

You can however make a sport of it over the skies of Nevada. Even with "life" ammo. "Gentlemen, pick your weapons!". Played like that, It makes the inconsistent product development of DCS' "modding community" also easier to bear.

 

And I wish they gave their planes a proper FM for AI planes as well as a better damage model. ("Hurray, I'm driving an F-5 and no Mig-21/F-4/... wants to dogfight with me, 'cos I'm a ground attack aircraft!"). So far, DCS is just FSX with guns and a small and flat VFR world. Still fun. But a looooooong way to go.

[Guest deleted@50488]

So far, DCS is just FSX with guns and a small and flat VFR world.

 

Well, although I do prefer IL.2 BoX, I can't say DCS is FSX, at least in as far as flight dynamics modelling goes...

[Urra]

Its taking longer to create a pixelated P40 than it did to design the real one, let it fly in combat, and send the remaining numbers to the scrap heap. Given their original model list WW2 is going to take about 200 years so dig into those trenches (so lets stay super positive right?).

[9./JG27DefaultFace]

Well according to their latest post they had it working 2 patches ago when ED screwed with the engine some more (ahem excuse me 'updated') and broke the whole FM.

Edited March 25, 2017 by =STP=Defaultface

[Scojo]

I just can't get behind DCS.

 

It just feels like overpriced work designed by someone with severe ADHD.

 

I know this doesn't add anything to the discussion. I'm just venting because I wasted $60 a little while ago and haven't had anyone to properly complain about my own stupidity to lol

[Finkeren]

Well according to their latest post they had it working 2 patches ago when ED screwed with the engine some more (ahem excuse me 'updated') and broke the whole FM.

But the system of 3rd party developers works great!

 

Because: Capitalism.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

I just can't get behind DCS.

 

It just feels like overpriced work designed by someone with severe ADHD.

 

I know this doesn't add anything to the discussion. I'm just venting because I wasted $60 a little while ago and haven't had anyone to properly complain about my own stupidity to lol

 

I'm looking forward to where the platform is at 10+ years from now (really hoping for a lot more expansion/investment in WWII although the majority of DCS' community seems against this) but there is nothing worthwhile to keep me going.

 

I own:

MiG15-bis

F-86

F5-E

A10 C

Bf 109 K-4

Fw 190 D

P51

 

And out of all of these nicely built models, I can't find a damned thing worth doing that holds my attention.

[Lusekofte]

I would not invested so much in hardware if it had not been for DCS, when I realized the fact that bos was not for me, I figured I was finished with flight sims. Now I fly a little bos and a lot of DCS offline

[No_85_Gramps]

Interesting reading each others view points. My primary go-to-sim is BOX, and I am always looking forward to future development. Although I have invested a little in DCS, it will be interesting to watch it's further development. I'm on the fence about the DCS Normandy stuff. I'm not really into the modern jet scene, however, I really do enjoy tooling about in the Gazelle.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Interesting reading each others view points. My primary go-to-sim is BOX, and I am always looking forward to future development. Although I have invested a little in DCS, it will be interesting to watch it's further development. I'm on the fence about the DCS Normandy stuff. I'm not really into the modern jet scene, however, I really do enjoy tooling about in the Gazelle.

 

To each one it's own :-)

 

For me it was the exact opposite. Started with DCS after years using mostly civil flightsims, then met il.2, and it's now practically my only sim.

 

I really can't get anywhere near the same sensation of flight I get from il-2 BoS / BoM ... from the virtual flight to the visuals, light, sky rendering...

 

I still start ELITE for IFR training from time to time...

Edited March 13, 2017 by jcomm

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Well according to their latest post they had it working 2 patches ago when ED screwed with the engine some more (ahem excuse me 'updated') and broke the whole FM.

This is so true. MiG-21 suffered a lot from that. But then again, VEAO with their P-40 are very special snowflakes, there were always some issues and they were almost ready to release it but ... HAWK still has simplified FM

 

 

Because: Capitalism.

Capitalism > Socialism. Period 

[ZachariasX]

Well, although I do prefer IL.2 BoX, I can't say DCS is FSX, at least in as far as flight dynamics modelling goes...

That would depend on the module. Stock planes in FSX fly like AI planes in DCS. But if you pay the same 50 bucks for a plane in FSX, you get what you get in DCS. DCS and FSX compute FM in a rather similar fashion. It depends more on how much love is spent at an iduvidual aircraft than a sim being better. What DCS clearly does better, it renders terrain much more efficiently (more FPS for the same look) same as Aerosoft does.

[Thad]

Interesting reading each others view points. My primary go-to-sim is BOX, and I am always looking forward to future development. Although I have invested a little in DCS, it will be interesting to watch it's further development. I'm on the fence about the DCS Normandy stuff. I'm not really into the modern jet scene, however, I really do enjoy tooling about in the Gazelle.

I basically agree with your thoughts. I simply can't get into modern flying craft. Yet. On the other hand, I have a comfort, liking and affinity for WWII aircraft. That may be because I flew in several WII flight simulations in the past and they feel familiar.

[BeastyBaiter]

Opposite for me. I've been flying WW2 sims so long that I'm kind of burnt out on them for now. I still hop in BoS/BoM and do a few QMB sorties every week or two, but I lean more towards modern aircraft now. I've held off on buying BoK for that reason. I plan to grab it as one big pack at release so that it will hold my interest a bit better than the spoon fed content I'd get by buying it now. I am really looking forwards to the Hs-129 and P-39 over the mountains though.

 

Its taking longer to create a pixelated P40 than it did to design the real one, let it fly in combat, and send the remaining numbers to the scrap heap. Given their original model list WW2 is going to take about 200 years so dig into those trenches (so lets stay super positive right?).

 

That's just VEAO tbh. I think they have two core problems, the first is that the main guy wants to announce every project the instant a presentable WIP 3d model is made. That gives the massive list of "in progress" aircraft. The second is they don't have anyone actually programming the stuff. Hence no real progress is ever made. They had the good sense to cancel all their helicopters due to a lack of coders a year or so back, but VEAO's head guy just can't seem to bring himself to cancel any fixed wing stuff.

[Danziger]

Apparently Polychop aren't releasing any updates until they settle some internal legal matters.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

And Magnitude does not have contract with ED yet so only known thing at this point is Corsair, further modules will be discussed in future. Also they seem to have dropped the idea of Pacific expansion which they announced 3 years ago - starting with Corsair, Iwo-Jima and then Okinawa. 

 

As Dolphin said :

Corsair is unfortunate remnant of "Pacific theatre" set of aircraft we had plans to develop 3 years ago.

It was mostly me who was working on it since I had to make some research to prepare myself and a tem for large Pacific project (many human and AI planes, ships, ground units, and a map) and I needed single-piston-engine aircraft. Corsair was good enough for that purpose, since other aircraft had no finished-functional 3d model.

NOTE: even the Corsair hadn't finished 3d model, but it was looking good enough.

Corsair was in a good shape back in 2015 and beginning of 2016, but then mostly abandoned due to our internal problems.

I felt bad about that aircraft, having a feeling it will go down the drain eventually, so we made a deal to take it, giving some of our rights in return.

I had hopes for a Zero and Raiden in DCS but it most likely never be the case there. 

Edited March 15, 2017 by =LD=Hiromachi

[Guest deleted@50488]

For me it is very obvious / clear:

 

DCS = Modern Air War or for Helicopter simulation ( when done by Belsimtek... )

IL.2 Battle of ... = WW2

 

I wish I didn't spend all of the money I spent in ww2 modules for DCS :-/

Edited March 15, 2017 by jcomm

[JG5_Zesphr]

TBH I'm just waiting for the harrier as it is my all time favourite jet and it mixes well in the blue flag server. 

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

I wish I didn't spend all of the money I spent in ww2 modules for DCS :-/

 

I wish ED would get their act together and make a compelling, full-switch WWII sim possible.

 

It wouldn't replace BOX for me but it'd give clique-pitters an alternative that they wouldn't constantly complain about.

[ZachariasX]

 

 

and it mixes well in the blue flag server.

 

In offline missions, all fighters will not dogfight it as it is probably treated as "ground attack" same as the F-5 and you can't close in on them to use your sidewinders. Or throw bricks at them. With the Harrier, you're even slower then the F-5 for carrying the same puny weaponry.

 

But I guess it will be a lot of fun parking it in the driveway of your favourite Vegas hotels. That's one way of pissing of all those stretch-limo drivers... Looking forward to it.