DCS

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, BOO said:

it’s looks no better than the caucuses did ten years ago. 

That is just so wrong

[BOO]

2 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

That is just so wrong

Im really glad you say that as I trust your opinion. 

 

As I say, I can only go off the videos i've seen. I try to watch a few to take account of different grpahics settings. To me it does currently have the feel of IL2/Rhineland in terms of the sparseness and, too often, I seem to watch folk flying over road systems set out for non existent settlements.  For now I think there just a little too much "early" in the access for me. Hopefully, in time, the map will mature and pique my interest. And if it costs more then, as hinted, so be it. 

 

 

[Lusekofte]

There Are so many issues with Caucasus map in my opinion. It is like an old software mended thousand times in order to stay relevant 

 

It is like a house painted 60 times since new but never scraped in forehand. I find Marianas more smooth. 
 

In perspective I would like to see those mission makers with some imagination making a new oil rig campaign for this 

Caucasus simply do have too many populated areas in order to really need everything by chopper. 
I like to see a lot of action with home made farps for choppers. It is excellent for many things. 
But for now it is just too little populated and areas is not yet finished. 
What I do not like is the burial ceremony attitude made by those not bought it. That might scrap further development. Not unusual for communities like this. It is kind of what the cool guys say that counts. And I object loudly. It is no rush buying it for people not relating to this area. But damn, it is orbx we talk about. Give them some credit

Edited May 10, 2024 by Lusekofte

[Trooper117]

25 minutes ago, Lusekofte said:

what the cool guys say that counts.

 

What?... aren't you one of the cool guys? I thought you were!

[Lusekofte]

15 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

 

What?... aren't you one of the cool guys? I thought you were!

No never been a fan of cool guys

[Chief_Mouser]

1 hour ago, Lusekofte said:

No never been a fan of cool guys

 

But you live in a cool place Luse; both figuratively and climate-wise. 😁

[Gambit21]

2 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

But damn, it is orbx we talk about. Give them some credit

 

To be fair, you can't blame anyone for using the SA map as an indicator (to the positive or negative) all things considered. After all the same guy is in charge of developing both. So if you're still not happy with the condition of the SA map, you're not likely to give Orbx an automatic "it's in early access good faith" pass. If you like the SA map, you're likely not worried about Kola's future. Most of the reviews I see have been pretty balanced. 

 

I'm looking forward to seeing the winter version.

 

[AndyJWest]

Kola in winter is going to be on the gloomy side...

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, AndyJWest said:

Kola in winter is going to be on the gloomy side...

 
It’s going to be snowy - gloom is dependent on the weather settings

I like snow maps, and less dependent on texture res etc

[DD_fruitbat]

For what its worth, I like the Kola map. I think its way better than the SA map even in this early phase of its journey.

 

I don't mind the SA map for the record, but I only bought it for the scenery and I love flying in and around mountains. 

 

Your mileage may vary.

[BOO]

So after dissing the map without seeing it on my own system I guilted myself into buying it. 
 

6 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

Kola in winter is going to be on the gloomy side...

 

On the plus side there will be fewer shadows jutting out horizontally from the steep cliff faces.  And I don’t mean that in a snide way. DCSs shadows are not the best in certain situations. With Kola ithere is a suitable environment for overcast. 

[AndyJWest]

2 hours ago, BOO said:

So after dissing the map without seeing it on my own system I guilted myself into buying it. 
 

 

On the plus side there will be fewer shadows jutting out horizontally from the steep cliff faces.  And I don’t mean that in a snide way. DCSs shadows are not the best in certain situations. With Kola ithere is a suitable environment for overcast. 

 

Having the sun below the horizon certainly reduces problems with shadows. Most of the map is well inside the arctic circle, which is why I'm a little dubious about its utility for winter missions. 

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, AndyJWest said:

 

Having the sun below the horizon certainly reduces problems with shadows. Most of the map is well inside the arctic circle, which is why I'm a little dubious about its utility for winter missions. 

 

I'm not sure I follow. My wife and I follow a channel run by a woman who lives in Svalbard, which is WAY north of this map. After polar night is done, they have lots of snow on the ground along with a fair number of beautiful sunny days as the days begin to grow longer. I see no issues. Anyway not getting hung up on "winter" vs early spring...point is...snow.

 

[AndyJWest]

Fair enough. I suppose it depends on how one defines 'winter', or perhaps more importantly how DCS does, when it comes to setting dates for the map changes.

[BOO]

I now have the map and, after several hours of downloading thanks to my "so last season" interweb, I made good on my inabilty to sleep resultant from having a cyst roughly the same size as the Kola Peninsula removed from my back yesterday and free camera'd the hell outta it. . 

 

@Lusekofte you are correct. It is superior to the Caucauses in many aspects.

 

The high detailed settlements are nice and varied with no LOD issues I could see. Certainly better than Syria was/is. The presence of ships and other marine "fluff" in the marinas is also well done. Around these, gentler, coastal area, low level aspects are really very good although, as per DCS, one cannot help but feel royalty is about to visit given how clean everything is. And landmark bridges! Noice! 

 

Airfields and Airports, on the whole, are pretty good. Sometimes I feel they verge on that lego-esque MSFS look and there are many instances of buidlings and other stuff being dumped in the middle of fields with no road infrastrucutre. A little dissappointing given these are in some of those high detail areas. Overall though, not as bad as some make out.

 

The elephant in the room is the terrain and the manner of its execution. Flatter terrain works well at most altitudes. The more rugged areas not so much. What looks almost photo realistic and quite mesmerising at 7500ft drops its illusion rapidily as you decend. Craggy ravines turn into blurry flat black lines. Colours that look great high up appear unnatural and strangely over saturated at low level (again like MSFS). And those fanstacic looking strata turn into fuzzy felt. The introduction of a winter season will help in some ways but in others may make things worse, obliterating much of the faux releif colouring and reducing the impression of a multi faceted surface to a homogenous blob. 

 

Some costal areas, where its rocky, look bad at any alt, with a representation that I can only compaire to those cheap plastc topographic relief maps from the 60s and 70s. 

 

The colour palette of the map also seems a little off in its first iteration. Trees are very stark and dark against the land. This is not helped by DCS's new varied grass shading. The random shrubs work in places with as good a visibilty pop as the game allows but less so in others. Thats not unique to this map however. Some lightening of the trees and bushes would really help reduce the effect I think. 

 

All this said, I have no buyers regret. The map is big and Helos are slow so there is plenty of scope to fly around the many, gentler areas of the map that suit such activity. Over the more moutainous areas, Mid to high alt escapades will be rewarded with stunning vistas. Where the map would struggle for me at the moment though is fast mud pushing through the mountains. Even at speed the resolution and false shadow relief issues in those areas is just too noticable. But there are other maps for that. 

 

If somone said "thats all youre getting for your 45 quid" I wouldnt be too angst ridden. Although a little more pre lauch development wouldnt have hurt, its a pretty decent start. But it is a start and there is much to do still. 

[Lusekofte]

2 hours ago, BOO said:

Although a little more pre lauch development wouldnt have hurt

Yeah. That was my initial thought , too. 
But up in this area Bing rendered maps lacked a lot to desire in the beginning too.

If they just develop this map, at least for a minimum of population. And I mean better than they did Bodø. 
This is going to be a winner

[BOO]

Has ED given any indication of the roadmap in relation to releasing further sections of the Afghanistan map? 

 

 

[DD_fruitbat]

They have, it's in the map blurb release post. I can't remember the specific time frame they said, but it was months not years. I think 3 months of the top of my head for each next section. 

[Gambit21]

Yep Wags said 3 months.

[BOO]

Duh! - Ive read that post 3 times today.....attention span of a gnat!

[DBFlyguy]

 

[Gambit21]

Nice! 

 

I’m obsessed with Chinook research right now.

 

F-4 plans on hold pending Kola map turning out how I hope.

 

 

 

Edited May 15, 2024 by Gambit21

[Lusekofte]

I am in no skape or form to take om the Phantom atm. My interest for fixed wing is not high enough right now for the proper motivation needed to learn it. It’s like the Tomcat. Just a wonderful pit to sit in. 
I bought it, I will carefully and slowly get to know it. 
Chinook is another thing. I am a rotor head.  
but I think I still will have the MI 8 as a favourite 😻 after flying it. 
I suspect Chinook will feel too stable , like the Blackhawk mod. And Apache. Easy to fly , capable yes. But in the long run just kind of routine. MI 8 still manage to trick me into a devastating mistake. 

[BOO]

I keep swaying in and out of the F4 (especially since all Ill be doing is sitting in the pit for the next six months).  Once Halfghanistan becomes Wholeghanistan however, I envisage the next 3 years of my sim life being basically this....

 

 

[BOO]

 

Anything Reflected is good but this does genuniely seem to be another level of thinkin bout stuff...

[DBFlyguy]

29 minutes ago, BOO said:

 

Anything Reflected is good but this does genuniely seem to be another level of thinkin bout stuff...

Reflected definitely makes cool campaigns but this one seems to be a really odd choice... There were literally F-4E's at the USAF Weapons School based at Nellis in the 70s.  I feel like that would've been a campaign where you didn't have to compromise on so many things not in the game currently... but just my opinion, I'm sure it'll sell well!

[Lusekofte]

I love his paradise campaign in Huey 

I bought a ww2 campaign too

not flown it yet. I won’t buy it anytime soon. Getting there will take me ages. 

[Gambit21]

34 minutes ago, DBFlyguy said:

Reflected definitely makes cool campaigns but this one seems to be a really odd choice... There were literally F-4E's at the USAF Weapons School based at Nellis in the 70s.  I feel like that would've been a campaign where you didn't have to compromise on so many things not in the game currently... but just my opinion, I'm sure it'll sell well!

 

Reflected is very exacting. Much more so than I would be, which is why he chose not to do a Weapons School campaign. There just isn’t enough public domain info on that program, whereas much more is available on Top Gun. So despite the incorrect variant everything else will be spot on.

 

My preference was Weapons School and just make up a plausible syllabus.

I was in the process of building it  (2 missions built mostly to completion sans voice calls) but stopped because the terrain textures on the Nevada map are just too dated at low level and I lost interest. Just too fugly. If they ever give Nevada a facelift it’s a possibility, but at this point I doubt it.

 

I’ve sort of moved on from the F-4 😂 pending Kola map improvements. 

[BOO]

The big concern I have with the camapign is that I'll have to reinstall Nevada and eat 35GB of disk Im rapidly running out of. DCS is rapidly becoming a behemoth of MSFS proportions. 

 

It did coerce me into finally committing to the F4 though after a few weeks of hovering.

 

With Kola, Afghanistan and the F4 its been a bloody expensive month for someone who hasnt even got a joystick to hand......

 

 

[Gambit21]

6 hours ago, BOO said:

The big concern I have with the camapign is that I'll have to reinstall Nevada and eat 35GB of disk Im rapidly running out of. DCS is rapidly becoming a behemoth of MSFS proportions. 

 

It did coerce me into finally committing to the F4 though after a few weeks of hovering.

 

With Kola, Afghanistan and the F4 its been a bloody expensive month for someone who hasnt even got a joystick to hand......

I had uninstalled Marianas some time ago to gain a bit of space but I reinstalled last night to see if I want to use it instead of Syria for a few Ch-47 training ops (2 map campaign. Afghanistan and X). I was going to use Syria but after having a real look around Marianas - might go there for 3-4 missions then deploy to Afghanistan. 
 

Syria is very nice, but down in the weeds in the outlying hills and such (which is where I’m looking) it falls apart a bit. It’s OK, but Marianas has the edge for helo ops IMO.

 

 

[BOO]

5 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

I had uninstalled Marianas some time ago to gain a bit of space but I reinstalled last night to see if I want to use it instead of Syria for a few Ch-47 training ops (2 map campaign. Afghanistan and X). I was going to use Syria but after having a real look around Marianas - might go there for 3-4 missions then deploy to Afghanistan. 
 

Syria is very nice, but down in the weeds in the outlying hills and such (which is where I’m looking) it falls apart a bit. It’s OK, but Marianas has the edge for helo ops IMO.

 

My own impression of the maps from the past couple of years is that EDs maps may not have all the headline grabbing bells and whistles but they are generally a little better executed and optimised overall at least at launch. I hope this holds for Afghanistan. 

 

 

 

 

[Gambit21]

5 hours ago, BOO said:

My own impression of the maps from the past couple of years is that EDs maps may not have all the headline grabbing bells and whistles but they are generally a little better executed and optimised overall at least at launch. I hope this holds for Afghanistan. 

I think it will.- Afghanistan looks great (down low) from the videos I’ve seen. Unlike Kola where it was kept essentially out of sight until release. 

[Art-J]

Re. campaign theme choice, I suspect it's also related to how popular / recognizable a theme is. Everyone and their mother has at least heard about "Top Gun", but only basement nerds and anoraks know about this "Weapons School" thingy. I'll have to look it up myself now, being mostly a WWII guy and only vaguably recollecting that USAF started catching up with Navy after Vietnam.

[1/JSpan_Wind75]

Hi everyone,

I'm thinking about installing the Eagle Dinamy but only to fly WWII planes,
It's worth it?

Is it always Klicables booths? Or can the commands be mapped?

Is it in any way better than the IL-2?

The idea is to buy the planes or Warbird and the campaigns (Normandia for example) created, since I usually fly a lot Off-Line
I would appreciate your opinion on this topic.

 

Thanks in advance to everyone.

[Jade_Monkey]

Yes it's worth it if the budget is no issue.

 

It's more immersive (maps, airfields, large formations).

 

You can map all controls to your hotas and also click.

 

The two things I dislike are the AI (cheating and flying like UFOs) and the damage model.

[BOO]

Best to ask on the DCS thread rather than open up a new one as the mods will likely close this. 
 

If you a have look through the posts there  you’ll get a good impression of the good and bad but you asking will get you a good range of opinions. 
 

Ultimately it’s apples and oranges and very dependent on the individual. 
 

 

[Aapje]

There is actually a recent thread on this on the DCS forum: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/348561-is-it-time-to-give-up-on-dcs-ww2/

 

Basically, there are upsides and downsides to both.

[Mtnbiker1998]

Not worth it imo. To put it as simply as possible, wrong planes on the wrong map for WAY too much money, with trash ai and barely any content. Il-2 sure as hell ain't perfect, but its by far the best WW2 sim on the market right now.

 

Also, if you decide you're interested in Modern aircraft, highly advise you give Falcon BMS a try over DCS. Much better simulation of modern war, has a GREAT campaign system to boot (far superior to IL-2's career mode or PWCG) plus great AI, proper ATC and plenty more all for FREE assuming you have an original Falcon 4 install. (These can be "acquired" online a few different ways, or purchased on GoG or Steam for a few bucks)

[[DBS]Tx_Tip]

12 minutes ago, Mtnbiker1998 said:

Not worth it imo. To put it as simply as possible, wrong planes on the wrong map for WAY too much money, with trash ai and barely any content. Il-2 sure as hell ain't perfect, but its by far the best WW2 sim on the market right now.

 

Word

[Lusekofte]

2 hours ago, Mtnbiker1998 said:

Not worth it imo. To put it as simply as possible, wrong planes on the wrong map for WAY too much money, with trash ai and barely any content. Il-2 sure as hell ain't perfect, but its by far the best WW2 sim on the market right now.

 

Also, if you decide you're interested in Modern aircraft, highly advise you give Falcon BMS a try over DCS. Much better simulation of modern war, has a GREAT campaign system to boot (far superior to IL-2's career mode or PWCG) plus great AI, proper ATC and plenty more all for FREE assuming you have an original Falcon 4 install. (These can be "acquired" online a few different ways, or purchased on GoG or Steam for a few bucks)

Subjective opinions is what we all put forward and must respect. 
But when I do it I try to put a suggestion on a fix for it and in proper place. And it is not here. I do fly ww2 in DCS more than I do in GB. Because you actually feel you operating something. I won’t go into what I don’t like with DCS and GB here because it got no point doing so. 
In your logic I wasted over 1000$ in GB software. Probably more when you count in the gifts. But that would be taking the simplest path to a bit more complex explanation. You see it ilmight not be worth it for you. But it is for me.