DCS

[scram77]

I only have the Huey and the F-5 along with the Nevada map.  I just don't have the time to put into the learning curves at the moment so have avoided buying anymore.  I've put a few hours into the Huey and learned the start up for the F-5 but not been able to use the weapons yet.  I think I'm waiting for 2.5 before I put more time into it......that or the F-18....

[Toxin1]

Still holding out hope for a Korean War Map & Asset Pack to go with my F-86 and MIG-15

[Lusekofte]

Do not hold your breath

 

I do not like multiplayer in DCS, but I like the campaigns, not dynamic, but well done anyway. It is single player that keep me interested, and I think that is why I do not use the WW2 modules , except when I just want to fly around and do nothing. But that sort of thing is equal interesting in BOS, so it depends what game I am in when I do it

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

learned the start up for the F-5 but not been able to use the weapons yet.

Master arm switch up, pylon selectors up for the weapons you want, squeeze the secondary fire button. It's pretty much that. For bombs and rockets you need to manually calibrate the sight in relation to the attack approach you'll be flying, rotate the ordinance knob from safe to RKT, BOMB or RPL and with bombs specifically you need to arm the fuzes.

Edited November 30, 2017 by 216th_Lucas_From_Hell

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

So I went online on DCS to meet the Harrier hoard. 14 Harriers and 2 F-15 against 3 Su-27. Seemed fair enough.

 

In this fateful mission I encountered a Harrier attempting to hover near the front lines. As the manual dictates, I gave him a radar lock and launch warning, which scared the guy into crashing. Hihi.

[nirvi]

Caucasus 2.0 WIP

https://www.facebook.com/eagle.dynamics/posts/10159731815500341

 

 

 

 

 

 

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Nirvi, I presume you have a better perspective on this things. Is Caucasus 2.0 intended to come with 2.5 and is that the version supposed to sort of merge 1.5.8 with 2.1 ?

[BeastyBaiter]

It purdy, hopefully it gets more than 23 fps in VR on 104th!

Edited December 1, 2017 by BeastyBaiter

[Blooddawn1942]

Nirvi, I presume you have a better perspective on this things. Is Caucasus 2.0 intended to come with 2.5 and is that the version supposed to sort of merge 1.5.8 with 2.1 ?

Exactly this. And according to Wags statement, we can expect the long awaited merge "within weeks".

While it's pretty obvious that in regards to DCS patient is a virtue, it's possible we see 2.5 maybe even before the end of the year.

[nirvi]

Nirvi, I presume you have a better perspective on this things. Is Caucasus 2.0 intended to come with 2.5 and is that the version supposed to sort of merge 1.5.8 with 2.1 ?

Correct. The new caucasus map is the last item missing for DCS 2.5.

When the new caucasus map is released, we will only have one version of DCS where you can play all maps from (Caucasus 2.0, NTTR, Normandy, and the coming Strait of Hormuz)

[Blooddawn1942]

Correct. The new caucasus map is the last item missing for DCS 2.5.

When the new caucasus map is released, we will only have one version of DCS where you can play all maps from (Caucasus 2.0, NTTR, Normandy, and the coming Strait of Hormuz)

So as it was stated, 1.5 is obviously phasing out. So far so good. But as it is now, 1.5 is the stable version of DCS World, while DCS World 2 with the version 2.1 is in alpha state.

I keep wondering what will be the stable after the release of 2.5?

Is 2.5 supposed to be the stable with NTTR remaining in alpha status within 2.5?

Quite irritated...

[nirvi]

So as it was stated, 1.5 is obviously phasing out. So far so good. But as it is now, 1.5 is the stable version of DCS World, while DCS World 2 with the version 2.1 is in alpha state.

I keep wondering what will be the stable after the release of 2.5?

Is 2.5 supposed to be the stable with NTTR remaining in alpha status within 2.5?

Quite irritated...

My guess (nothing official):

We will get a release and open beta branch as it is now.

So 2.5 release and 2.5 open beta.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

What about that Vulkan stuff ? I remember I've asked last year Jason on Q&A about its implementation into Il-2 and he said that they have no plans for that for the foreseeable future. Knowing that both Il-2 and DCS so far take poor advantage of multicore cpus, I'm very interested in benefits Vulkan should provide. DCS 2.1 requires some optimization, so whatever change is made towards improving performnace ... is more than welcomed.

[Finkeren]

Nice color palette on those screens, I can't help but think that it's still got some catching-up to do to reach BoX Kuban-map quality. The meandering rivers look like they did back in Rise of Flight.

 

The draw distance on trees seems better, though the lower LoD starts too close to the camera IMHO.

[Plesski]

Do you guys have knowledge if DCS Steam version will also be upgraded to 2.5?

 

P.

[BeastyBaiter]

I expect the steam version will be updated alongside the DCS stable version. As for how it will roll out, the obvious way is for 2.x alpha to become 2.5 beta, dropping 1.5 beta and letting 1.5 stable linger on for an undetermined amount of time before becoming 2.5 stable.

 

The Vulkan bit is very interesting to me. I would have thought they'd go for DX12 if anything, since that would be a much easier transition than Vulkan. I don't have much experience with DX11 and none at all with DX12, but one would think it's similar to going from OpenGL 4.5 to Vulkan. That transition lets you keep nearly all your code, it's just some setup that changes. But going from DX11 to Vulkan (or OpenGL) is a total rewrite. There are a lot of big advantages to Vulkan (not tied to Windows 10 being the biggest), but I'm still surprised they'd choose it over the easier solution.

Edited December 1, 2017 by BeastyBaiter

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Dx 12 gives no benefits, so far every game I've tried with it saw only a decrease of FPS and a quick decision on my side to switch in options back to Dx 11. Dx 12 is a failure.

[HippyDruid]

If I was to hazard a guess, then prehaps, moving forward DCS may have plans for 'other' platform support.

A major change in the code would still be required if they move forward with DX12 anyway. Both DX12 and Vulkan are low-level API's and they're fairly complicated to use correctly.

 

I'm quite pleased to hear this from them actually, as it will be really interesting to see how the technology pans out for them. I wish them all the best! 

[BeastyBaiter]

Dx 12 gives no benefits, so far every game I've tried with it saw only a decrease of FPS and a quick decision on my side to switch in options back to Dx 11. Dx 12 is a failure.

 

That isn't entirely true. Nvidia cards have either no change or a small decrease but AMD cards see an increase. I've heard Nvidia's drivers convert DX12 into DX11 to run on their cards, thus adding more overhead and defeating the whole point of DX12, but I don't know if that's true or not. It's just a rumor I've heard from some typically reliable techtubers.

 

Hippy, the other platforms is a possibility. DCS is ED's little side project when not working on military or commercial products. I've heard the Russian government doesn't like Windows, so maybe ED is making something for them to run on Linux. Doing that would explain the move to Vulkan.

Edited December 1, 2017 by BeastyBaiter

[SeaW0lf]

I'm not sure if this makes sense or to what extent this is all true, but it is good to hear.

 

Now, let's talk a little about DCS World War II and why it does not delay our modern day combat aircraft and why it's a valuable aspect of DCS World for us and you.

• We cannot deliver modern, complicated aircraft faster than we and our 3rd parties are already doing, but growing a business needs more and more revenue to grow the team and make better products. We were very surprised to find that the investment vs. generated revenue has been excellent for the World War II aircraft. In fact, the P-51D Mustang has twice the cost effectiveness of the A-10C Warthog.
• We also realized that our World War II aircraft attract new customers that may have not otherwise been familiar with DCS World. Many DCS World War II pilots move to our jet aircraft that are within the integral DCS World. So, our World War II aircraft provide a good advertising environment for the DCS World concept as a whole.
• As we bring in new programmers, artists, and engineers to Eagle Dynamics, it is first necessary to place them on relatively more simple projects to get them up to speed. World War II aircraft are a great tool for this. Our new staff can use the World War II aircraft to learn our tools and sharpen their talents with DCS World development environment. They are separate from the main projects (like the F/A-18C) developers, and they are not involved with the modern aircraft development efforts. Otherwise, it would not be practical to develop the aircraft like the F/A-18C with staff split between projects.
• The Fighter Collection (TFC), Eagle Dynamic's principle partner, has one of the largest, private collections of World War II aircraft. TFC has been requesting World War II aircraft for DCS World for a long time and we cannot ignore our partners. TFC has been instrumental in its support for these projects.

As you can see, DCS's World War II series doesn't compete with modern aircraft projects for development resources. In fact, it supports it. The same is true with the L-39 and Yak-52 projects. These two projects were also sought by government institutions, but we were also able to negotiate their release to you.

I very much hope this all makes sense for you.

[Rolling_Thunder]

I would take everything in that letter with a bucket of salt. Its mostly a reaction to the announcement of BoBp and the many DCS flyers expressing a switch to BoS

[Uufflakke]

I would take everything in that letter with a bucket of salt. Its mostly a reaction to the announcement of BoBp and the many DCS flyers expressing a switch to BoS

 

That is exactly what I was thinking when reading the above good news show.

[dburne]

Imho, both sims offer a lot for us combat flight sim fans, and each have their own specialties that they are very good at.

 

Certainly it would be easy to see why some would prefer one over the other, just speaking for myself I have a lot of fun with both and have had for quite some time.

 

It is a good thing we have both companies offering these sims to us.

[Danziger]

Its mostly a reaction to the announcement of BoBp

This. I really don't think the timing was a coincidence.

[Lusekofte]

I would take everything in that letter with a bucket of salt. Its mostly a reaction to the announcement of BoBp and the many DCS flyers expressing a switch to BoS

 

Well they are or flying COD, there is no dedicated WW2 DCS flyers , they do like us fly whatever after what mood we are in. WW2 DCS is nothing more than planes and a map , and do not hold its ground when it comes to CFS gameplay

[johncage]

Nice color palette on those screens, I can't help but think that it's still got some catching-up to do to reach BoX Kuban-map quality. The meandering rivers look like they did back in Rise of Flight.

 

The draw distance on trees seems better, though the lower LoD starts too close to the camera IMHO.

yeah it's frustrating to see dcs finally implement features that were suggested year and years back. the new grass system with patchy coloration variation looks good though. maybe it will make up for something that often feels somewhat "too little, too late"

I would take everything in that letter with a bucket of salt. Its mostly a reaction to the announcement of BoBp and the many DCS flyers expressing a switch to BoS

and this is why competition is ultimately good. bobp basically lit a fire under their asses.

[Rolling_Thunder]

and this is why competition is ultimately good. bobp basically lit a fire under their asses.

Lets hope so, but history tells us meh doubt it.

[coconut]

 

 

WW2 DCS is nothing more than planes and a map

That's not really true, there's plenty of WWII models too and more are coming. True, they are sold separately, so it does look like they are deemed "non essential". Maybe there's a large enough crowd that likes to pretend they are flying restored models in present day.

There's also one campaign that I have heard about. Not flown it, not enough time, but it's there.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

I'm missing one thing in that message - any info on upcoming ww2 aircraft damage models. 

Edited December 3, 2017 by =LD=Hiromachi

[Lusekofte]

I do aprechiate ( I know that was spelled wrong) DCS WW2 modules , I really do, but not as CFS game. I  think these are the closest to the real thing in many ways. 

DCS lack not only a believable damage model, but also effect from hits . Objects damage effect is also not up for todays standard.

I simply do not look at it as CFS more a simulator with the ability too shoot things down. 

Personally I do not mind the planes itself, they simply have no interest to me as CFS objects either, but for simulator they do

[Monostripezebra]

And then there is the silly me always pointing out that the greatly made Mustang module is more then just WW2. From Korea to the "Football War" in the middle americas. I think that is where it fits best. WW2 in DCS has not really got me exited, so far, I love good study models of props, but for compelling WW2 MP you gotta have more and more balance in between what is. But that beeing said, some "Iron Eagles 3:Aces" movie adaptation is actually what I like make missions for in DCS. In the end it is all about having fun and I direly miss RoFs handgun modeling in DCS for a reason:

 

[ST_ami7b5]

:-D

[dburne]

That's not really true, there's plenty of WWII models too and more are coming. True, they are sold separately, so it does look like they are deemed "non essential". Maybe there's a large enough crowd that likes to pretend they are flying restored models in present day.

There's also one campaign that I have heard about. Not flown it, not enough time, but it's there.

 

Yep, Operation Epsom for the Spitfire over Normandy and it is very well done.

They are also working on one for the P-51 as well. 

Edited December 3, 2017 by dburne

[Urra]

I'm missing one thing in that message - any info on upcoming ww2 aircraft damage models.

True dat...

[Gambit21]

I would take everything in that letter with a bucket of salt. Its mostly a reaction to the announcement of BoBp and the many DCS flyers expressing a switch to BoS

Yep - and boy are they jumping ship.

Just wait till we get a Normandy map to boot...

[Danziger]

Finally gave in and bought NTTR Nevada map so I can get in on the newer graphics. I just want to get in my MiG-21bis again. I wish we could get a flyable Tupolev Bear but I won't hold my breath.

[Feathered_IV]

I would take everything in that letter with a bucket of salt. Its mostly a reaction to the announcement of BoBp and the many DCS flyers expressing a switch to BoS

 

It could be a reaction to something that happened years ago. 

[nirvi]

High altitude shots of Caucasus 2.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Blooddawn1942]

I wish that we will really see the Water with those whitecaps. As it is now, the water in Normandy and Nevada looks terrible. Even with stormy conditions on highest settings.

Edited December 6, 2017 by Blooddawn1942

[Finkeren]

Where’s the shoreline? Is there no sand in the Caucasus?