DCS

[Monostripezebra]

After a lot of unhappyness with a famous video hoster.. I have now made another vid in another place, about having some gazelle fun.

 

 

[BornToBattle]

Where’s my F-18???

 

Oh, and the old school cool F-14. Yeah, gotta have that!

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

You might like these:

 

 

 

 

[Sokol1]

DCS is criticized by lack of coherency between various modules/eras, but in a topic about a replacement for a "impossible to make in DCS standards" P-47 for "EUROPE 1944-45"  see what the "cockpit simulator" player want instead:

 

A6M, N1K1

YAK-3, Yak-9, La-5, Pe-2
F4U, F7F 
Hs 129
Spitfire 1, Blenheim 
Fiat G55, Mc 205, 
Foker D.XXI 

Fiesler 156, Piper Cub, DC-3

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3443333&postcount=59

 

As the guy resume latter: "ED might as well forget the WW2 map and assets and just make "DCS Warbirds for Airshows".

 

 

[BeastyBaiter]

The P-38, Ju-88 and Mosquito were tied for top spot in that pic you showed. All of them are appropriate, though the Ju-88 would be an odd choice. And there will always be that random person who wants they're pet plane in no matter how poorly it fits. If I were to vote in that list, I'd pick the AH-1J. It has absolutely nothing to do with WW2 of course and the reason I'd pick it is because I'd like to fly it, it would actually fit the mainline DCS asset set and it fills a gap currently in the game (western attack helicopter). Of course, it doesn't belong in that poll at all, but it's what I'd vote for regardless.

[Rolling_Thunder]

If they cant make the p47 and are looking for a replacement they should ask those folk who backed the kickstarter. They should also offer a refund to those who would want one. There is also the question of the 262. What happened to that? They cant find that documentation either? It was also part of the original line up. They look more and more inept every day. They cant even fix the memory leak in their own engine so they raise the minimum specs. They're a bunch of clowns.

[Gambit21]

The F-14 had me drooling for a second...then I once again remembered Sithspawn's behavior here and my desire to never again give them a penny is once again solidified.

[MiloMorai]

The Sith is engaged to be married. Maybe that will change him from being a grumpy old bachelor.

[Trooper117]

Anyone that has been married would tell you exactly the opposite...

[kestrel79]

2.5 release version is out. Downloading now. Looking forward to flying some jets again.

[DD_Arthur]

On 4/6/2018 at 2:41 PM, Trooper117 said:

Anyone that has been married would tell you exactly the opposite...

 

Lol lots!

[Monostripezebra]

Just some more silly fun with DCS physics:

 

 

[=FEW=Hauggy]

Following some very good points made up there about the famous button pushing simulator that is DCS I made a bit of research about the old kickstarter campaign of 2014.

I've read this and it turned out to be a sort of prophecy.

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/dcs-ww2-the-next-kickstarter-scam.92865/

Yes DCS scammed long time fans...

With their insane prices and complete incoherence in the planeset and the sheer greed displayed by not only selling a map that was supposed to be free with a plane for people to try and get into the sim (we know that never happened the classification free to play on steam is kind of a lie imo) but nooo they also had to sell the tanks and trains to put on the damn map so you have something to bomb.

That display of greed is the main reason I refuse to even think about buying any DCS WW2 content.

Honestly i'm expecting DCS to sell AI controlled planes for people to shoot down at this point.

I'm not going to say the jet sim is bad because it's good and probably worth the price, at least my F15C was way worth it and I was glad to be able to fly the Suckoi to give the sim a try before investing into this money sinkhole of a franchise, which I didn't really did mostly because of the constant lag, I just ended up picking the 2 cheapest jets at the cheapest price possible.

Still I'd much rather invest my cash into il-2.

Edited April 8, 2018 by Hauggy

[Cunctator]

What I really dislike about DCS WWII is that ED apparently has currently completely stopped working on WW2 content people have already payed for. Still no bombs or drop tanks for the Spitfire after more than one year, the additional ground units and especially more AI planes for the assets pack, released one year ago, haven't be mentioned in months, asset pack units still can't be used with CA, the new damage model is officially on hold because the team has to work on other things. I guess the private Yak-52 contract and their modern line got in their way.   

 

I still consider the Kickstarter a fair deal. I paid about 50  € and got 2 planes, the map and assets pack. This particular industry veteran failed three times before, the kickstarter campaign itself was just chaotic. Always considered it a high risk investment.  

 

Current prices for DCS WWII are indeed insane.  Paying 60 $ for Hornet with free map and AI units is fully justified, but 1 WW2 fighter + map + assets pack + campaign = 120 $.  I expect the whole project will slowly die in the next years, while they are fully focusing on the Hornet, F-16C and new modern day maps. 

 

 

[Rolling_Thunder]

2 minutes ago, Cunctator said:

 

I still consider the Kickstarter a fair deal. I paid about 50  € and got 2 planes, the map and assets pack. 

 

What you should have got was 

Our heartfelt thanks, access to the backer section with weekly development updates, videos, and more, and a special BACKER medal on our official forums.

early access to the game’s closed beta.

a digital copy of all flyable aircraft (six in all) in the game (this will grow with the stretch goals and possibly end up offering a huge value!)

a spiral-bound copy of a complete aircraft manual for the plane of your choice.

Not to mention the SDK which was also promised.

The map was going to be free anyway. 

 

I consider what I, and others, got was shafted.

Oh and the Hornet is $80. the $60 is for early access which wont include all its systems for a few years yet.

 

[Gambit21]

On 4/8/2018 at 10:49 AM, Cunctator said:

What I really dislike about DCS WWII is that ED apparently has currently completely stopped working on WW2 content people have already payed for. Still no bombs or drop tanks for the Spitfire after more than one year, the additional ground units and especially more AI planes for the assets pack, released one year ago, haven't be mentioned in months, asset pack units still can't be used with CA, the new damage model is officially on hold because the team has to work on other things. I guess the private Yak-52 contract and their modern line got in their way.   

 

I still consider the Kickstarter a fair deal. I paid about 50  € and got 2 planes, the map and assets pack. This particular industry veteran failed three times before, the kickstarter campaign itself was just chaotic. Always considered it a high risk investment.  

 

Current prices for DCS WWII are indeed insane.  Paying 60 $ for Hornet with free map and AI units is fully justified, but 1 WW2 fighter + map + assets pack + campaign = 120 $.  I expect the whole project will slowly die in the next years, while they are fully focusing on the Hornet, F-16C and new modern day maps. 

 

 

 

So same $hti, different year.

I regret paying for the Dora years ago thinking I'd eventually have reason to install DCS and use it.

I lost track of how many years ago that was now. YEARS.

Our team here is making them look worse all the time.

 

 

 

 

[Vig]

I have been wary of DCS but the recent Steam sale had deep enough discounts to get me to bite.  The F-86, MiG 15, and Viggen seem very well done.  I don't expect much in the way of development, but I will be pleased if the AI Draken is actually completed.  One of my favorite aircraft.

[Field-Ops]

Now thats a matchup DCS should pursue, the Mig-15 vs F-86. Those planes are modeled so well and it seems they let them go to waste. They should have made campaigns like mad with this theater but its left in the dust to expand on dying promises.

[Gambit21]

They should have stuck with jets and committed to Korea years and years ago. I mean it still wouldn't be finished - let's not get silly. It would have been a worthwhile and wise endeavor though.

 

Instead just more aircraft with no plausible theater. That makes me the most sad where the MiG 15 comes in because they could have pulled me back in with that.

 

New title - DCS Air Show

 

[THERION]

They have excellent modules with very nice details - sometimes a bit too complex to me (modern times).

And some good maps.... but, as I said - modules - incoherent modules or to pick up the words from Gambit:

 

DCS - Air Show - now and then

[Lusekofte]

23 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Our team here is making them look worse all the time.

 

 

I usually agree with you, but sadly this time you are wrong. DCS offer me hours of fun, BOX series 30 minutes. It is subjective . I know a lot of people preferring DCS both jets and chopper before this. WW 2 modules is another story, I like them for flying, I do not like them for ground handling and war-game. 

[Gambit21]

Glad it's working for you LuseKofte. 

[Cunctator]

Indeed Korea should have been their niche, but I fear DCS will now be stuck in late WW2 Europe for the considerable future. A Korea map could be made in both historic and more modern versions. The Korean War also offers a lot of good opportunities for well known piston engine aircraft, popular in Russia and the West. Late F4Us, Mustangs, Sea Furies vs. La-9, Yak-9, Il-10.

[Feathered_IV]

It looks like Bodenplatte will have pretty much all the DCS WW2 aircraft, but in a coherent and affordable package.  With a map that is relevant to the aircraft, a career, smooth MP, and 30 other planes in accompanying packages.  Plus a release schedule that makes DCS seem like its standing still.

[JimTM]

I think they have been preoccupied for quite awhile with getting the EDGE graphics engine going, rolling out Normandy, and merging the Caucasus and Nevada map streams into the current package. I suspect that once they get through the memory and slow-map-loading issues in the current release, the WWII development will move faster.

 

I do love taking the Spit IX up in DCS (not to mention the superb Huey). However, BoX gives a much better overall experience at the moment and promises to get better and better.

 

Between BoX, DCS, and X-Plane, I'm a pretty happy pilot.

Edited April 13, 2018 by JimTM

[Vig]

Coherent is the thing; if all the DCS offerings were Korean era fighters there would be a fine assortment by now.  But it's all over the board and will, I think, never amount to much.

[InProgress]

I always wanted to try DCS, expecially fly mi8/24. But then i look at poor or non existing single player, you can get few campaigns, maybe some made by users. But it's still just a scripted stuff for few hours.. There is no bigger picture, no story. It's just playground for multiplayer. I found some user made dynamic campaigns but only for some fighters and not helis :/

 

Is there any news or hopes that these devs will stop spamming planes from all human history (soon probably ww1) and actually focus on 1 thing and develop it? For now there are like 2 old jets from korea war time, but that's all.. (mig15 would be something i would like to fly as well) no story, no korean war, no map(?) or anything. It's just 2 planes to fly in multi..

Some kind of background for stuff they made, a Syria campaign were you can fly russian aircrafts including helicopters on patrols, missions to attack ground target or protect etc. Just something that would give you unlimited replayability with historical background.

[Hoots]

Pretty much what in progress said, I have a lot of the modules but mostly it'll be 30 minute circuit and bumps with the occasional weapons practice on the simpler ones and it does this very well. Haven't really got time to devote to learning one module in depth. That's not the game's fault obviously but there isn't much to make me want to do more. I like the harrier though, simple enough to drop bombs but can't remember all the keystrokes for mavericks!

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Hey InProgress, the idea of a DCS: Sopwith Camel and a DCS: Albatross D.Va is pretty cool. 

[Brano]

4 minutes ago, Space_Ghost said:

Hey InProgress, the idea of a DCS: Sopwith Camel and a DCS: Albatross D.Va is pretty cool. 

For proper starting procedure ala DCS you will be required to have two players. One can not sit in cockpit and in the same time spin the prop ?

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

10 minutes ago, Brano said:

For proper starting procedure ala DCS you will be required to have two players. One can not sit in cockpit and in the same time spin the prop ?

 

"Chief - connect the ground power."

[Lusekofte]

I think ED is rather inconsequent in all regards, there is obviously problems in absolutely all regards, I normally do not fly online, so I cannot discuss anything on that part. For campaigns and choppers, there is no competition. It is absolutely the best sim for choppers, and cheapest. I will invest in XP and its choppers when time allows me more flying time. But I know a lot of people active in BOX servers before,now ditched it and prefer flying SAAB Viggen and that generation of jets. This is why I bother to reply on bastant opinions about BOX and DCS . Yes Bodenplatte get all interesting airplanes , but still, those preferring DCS is not interested. DCS give other stuff than BOX can provide, and BOX give what DCS is not able to. It is ment for different people, or people like me with different interest and not willing to let go any of them

[dburne]

15 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I think ED is rather inconsequent in all regards, there is obviously problems in absolutely all regards, I normally do not fly online, so I cannot discuss anything on that part. For campaigns and choppers, there is no competition. It is absolutely the best sim for choppers, and cheapest. I will invest in XP and its choppers when time allows me more flying time. But I know a lot of people active in BOX servers before,now ditched it and prefer flying SAAB Viggen and that generation of jets. This is why I bother to reply on bastant opinions about BOX and DCS . Yes Bodenplatte get all interesting airplanes , but still, those preferring DCS is not interested. DCS give other stuff than BOX can provide, and BOX give what DCS is not able to. It is ment for different people, or people like me with different interest and not willing to let go any of them

 

Yes this would apply to me as well, I enjoy each for what they uniquely offer. 

[Wolf8312]

10 hours ago, InProgress said:

I always wanted to try DCS, expecially fly mi8/24. But then i look at poor or non existing single player, you can get few campaigns, maybe some made by users. But it's still just a scripted stuff for few hours.. There is no bigger picture, no story. It's just playground for multiplayer. I found some user made dynamic campaigns but only for some fighters and not helis :/

 

Is there any news or hopes that these devs will stop spamming planes from all human history (soon probably ww1) and actually focus on 1 thing and develop it? For now there are like 2 old jets from korea war time, but that's all.. (mig15 would be something i would like to fly as well) no story, no korean war, no map(?) or anything. It's just 2 planes to fly in multi..

Some kind of background for stuff they made, a Syria campaign were you can fly russian aircrafts including helicopters on patrols, missions to attack ground target or protect etc. Just something that would give you unlimited replayability with historical background.

 

Nah man you're missing out big time and I feel I have to speak out in defence of my joint favourite combat flight simulator.

I love them both like a good father loves two very different children. Equally, and with no favourites! They both have their pros and cons, and in many ways as others are saying they cannot really be compared fairly.

As an example people say BOS looks better than DCS as a statement of fact when really it isn't quite that simple, and even the graphic engines of both have their own strengths and weaknesses. Closer to the ground, say flying over a large city (Vegas) is much more convincing in DCS, you feel as if you are actually in a city whereas with BOS I find getting too close to the ground can be more immersion breaking graphically.

 

DCS is the best modern combat simulator in the world and in VR it is an experience with only one equal- battle of Stalingrad. It is a fantastic experience and until BOS was updated recently DCS had a lot more content going for it, than BOS ever had, and more importantly with a very simple to use mission editor, as well as the ability to customize almost every option and setting imaginable, in a way you cannot with BOS. This makes it perfect for VR giving you for example the ability to turn off clouds, or remove assets that are hurting performance.

It's performance problems are actually specific to certain modules (viggen) and situations (bombings) that as a single player user I can largely avoid especially thanks again to the mission editor.

The new update has problems at the moment, but so does the BOS update (clouds being the biggest IMO) and I believe both will be improved over time.

Personally I love DCS as a helicopter simulator, and helicopter flying is something that is not as affected by re-projection in the same way that dogfighting in prop planes can be. So it's a very smooth almost flawless expereince!

Flying a helicopter in and out of skyscrapers in VR (in vegas at night) flying down into tunnels and looping up and around again taking out hostile enemies with missiles is quite literally exhilarating. I cant really even begin to put it into words! Absolutely love it! As the old adage goes don't knock it till you've tried it!

If you haven't got into helicopters yet give it a go. Some people like me fall in love with them! I'm actually much more skilled in helicopters than I am prop planes probably because I enjoy them more. With the correct set up it feels like the machine is an extension of yourself and the level of control you have over them makes you feel like a mechanical hawk/terminator!

Also remember too that DCS has something that BOS lacks, with clickable cockpits and extensive modelling of the modules, it is much more about learning how to fly a modern AC, and a challenge/reward almost to the extent that it would be in real life. With BOS you just hit a button, DCS is seriously in depth but can be hugely immersive and satisfying because of this!

Get into DCS man you will not be dissapointed!

 

Edited April 13, 2018 by Wolf8312

[Blutaar]

1 hour ago, Wolf8312 said:

Also remember too that DCS has something that BOS lacks, with clickable cockpits and extensive modelling of the modules,

 

And render range. Its a shame that DCS has no oldshool bombers. Imagine flying a Ju88 at 7km altitude and being able to see that city where your target is located for hundreds of kilometers and even smaller stuff. 

 

I pretty much agree with what you said. I also like DCS alot and waited for the update a long time. As the uptdate came out i played DCS Blackshark like crazy. Even with all the downsides like poor lighting effects in cockpit and so. For me the 2.5 experience was very smooth after i got rid of the constant stutters i had. AI did what they supposed to do and didnt hinder my enjoyment to much. Sure the AI in DCS is far from perfect but its better then what BoX offers where the AI is the reason for me not playing. Again!

 

I also agree that DCS is to incoherent like many people said but that dosent hold me back from playing it, as long as the Simulation part works. I disagree with the overall negativity in this forum when it comes to DCS. DCS is in many ways better then BoX and in as many ways dont. For example the graphics are better in DCS in my opinion because the render range alone makes it looks superior and more realistic. The rest looks good enough for me even if houses and other stuff have less polygones i dont care, the overall picture looks amaising. I know that terrain distance has increased in BoX and im very thankful for it but the render range of objects is still loughable, sorry to say that. So what im trying to say is, that both games are great and that i can enjoy both. And i love the WW2 birds and the normandy map. But like a said i also love BoX for what it is.

 

The good thing is, both will continue to get better and better and everyone should enjoy both games without looking down to each other.

[Wolf8312]

5 minutes ago, Ishtaru said:

 

And render range. Its a shame that DCS has no oldshool bombers. Imagine flying a Ju88 at 7km altitude and being able to see that city where your target is located for hundreds of kilometers and even smaller stuff. 

 

I pretty much agree with what you said. I also like DCS alot and waited for the update a long time. As the uptdate came out i played DCS Blackshark like crazy. Even with all the downsides like poor lighting effects in cockpit and so. For me the 2.5 experience was very smooth after i got rid of the constant stutters i had. AI did what they supposed to do and didnt hinder my enjoyment to much. Sure the AI in DCS is far from perfect but its better then what BoX offers where the AI is the reason for me not playing. Again!

 

I also agree that DCS is to incoherent like many people said but that dosent hold me back from playing it, as long as the Simulation part works. I disagree with the overall negativity in this forum when it comes to DCS. DCS is in many ways better then BoX and in as many ways dont. For example the graphics are better in DCS in my opinion because the render range alone makes it looks superior and more realistic. The rest looks good enough for me even if houses and other stuff have less polygones i dont care, the overall picture looks amaising. I know that terrain distance has increased in BoX and im very thankful for it but the render range of objects is still loughable, sorry to say that. So what im trying to say is, that both games are great and that i can enjoy both. And i love the WW2 birds and the normandy map. But like a said i also love BoX for what it is.

 

The good thing is, both will continue to get better and better and everyone should enjoy both games without looking down to each other.

 

Yeah there are times in DCS in VR with the right setting and lighting where the game looks almost photo realistic. Of course there are other times with the wrong setting and lighting when it looks pretty rough but thanks yet again to the editor you can choose whatever time you like!

 

 

Edited April 13, 2018 by Wolf8312

[dburne]

4 hours ago, Wolf8312 said:

 

If you haven't got into helicopters yet give it a go. Some people like me fall in love with them! I'm actually much more skilled in helicopters than I am prop planes probably because I enjoy them more. With the correct set up it feels like the machine is an extension of yourself and the level of control you have over them makes you feel like a mechanical hawk/terminator!

Also remember too that DCS has something that BOS lacks, with clickable cockpits and extensive modelling of the modules, it is much more about learning how to fly a modern AC, and a challenge/reward almost to the extent that it would be in real life. With BOS you just hit a button, DCS is seriously in depth but can be hugely immersive and satisfying because of this!

Get into DCS man you will not be dissapointed!

 

 

Amen to that.

My first foray into DCS was with the KA-50 Black Shark way back when.

First thing I learned in DCS, and man did it have a learning curve but was so rewarding.

I love flying that thing in VR as well. 

 

Flying combat missions in the KA-50 is quite exhilarating. And especially fun with VR.

 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

They're very different games, all in all.

 

Il-2 immerses you with what's happening outside of the cockpit - the environment is intense, the campaign is now infinitely replayable, and when you do look inside the cockpits are gorgeous too. These being WW2 aircraft there isn't all that much to fiddle with inside bar engine management so beyond minor things like flicking on the magnetos clickable cockpits here wouldn't change anything.

 

DCS immerses you through what's happening inside the cockpit. Even when there's a whole lotta nothing going on outside, you're still going over the wall of gauges and switches and operating them to the best you can, following procedures and all that jazz. This works very well in aircraft that need that extra attention to the cockpit, not so much for simpler times like WW2. When content is available, DCS modules are awesome but many still don't have a proper campaign included.

 

Both simulators have excellent flight models, beautiful maps, aircraft and objects, and provide a fantastic experience when looked at as a whole. Now, after both Il-2 and DCS have put forwards their big updates, I feel the main thing tipping the scale towards 1C:GS is how they handle these things. Both teams wanted to release 3.001 and 2.5 in December/January. DCS went ahead and delivered it on time, while 1C:GS delayed it by two months. While there are kinks to be ironed out, the Il-2 3.001 release is an almost entirely smooth experience, and hasn't even required any emergency hotfix. Meanwhile, three months on DCS has become a memory black hole because not enough optimization was done prior to switching to the new engine, and loading times have become obnoxious, causing big problems for all customers without extremely high-end gear. Interestingly enough, some multiplayer connection problems have been common to both titles.

 

As it is today, I just wish Eagle would keep their things in the oven for a little longer before releasing them to the world. The core developers and 3rd party developers have been more transparent recently (largely inspired, I believe, by the 1C:GS approach) which is a big step forwards from their previous ways, there has been better community outreach (on Hoggit at least) and production pace seems to be improving. These are good things, great in fact, and they make me happy. If I had to give a prize to one of the developers and producers however, it surely would go to the Moscow studio and Jason based on recent achievements.

 

The roadmap is looking a little more coherent, finally, with the Iran/UAE map coming out this year. That'll make use of almost everything in game. The Israel/Syria one that's planned will be good too since a lot of stuff in game or 'coming soon' flew or flies there today. Afghanistan also combines modern NATO stuff with older Soviet gear. In other words, the Middle East's unfortunate recent history will be a reasonable 3D playground for the flight sim kids.

 

Thankfully these two simulators can happily coexist, only for different things.

[Wolf8312]

10 hours ago, dburne said:

 

Amen to that.

My first foray into DCS was with the KA-50 Black Shark way back when.

First thing I learned in DCS, and man did it have a learning curve but was so rewarding.

I love flying that thing in VR as well. 

 

Flying combat missions in the KA-50 is quite exhilarating. And especially fun with VR.

 

 

Yes love the blackshark! It was my second module so coming in after the Warthog it felt comparatively easy, though I don't think I could remember how to start it anymore. It's a fantastic module but I prefer the Gazelle for it's agility and thrill factor though in real life I would choose the BS every time!  The Mi8 is also special and of course I feel I have to give a shout out to the Huey haha! Need to tear myself away from the Gazelle and give the others a fair chance I think!

 

[dburne]

2 hours ago, Wolf8312 said:

 

Yes love the blackshark! It was my second module so coming in after the Warthog it felt comparatively easy, though I don't think I could remember how to start it anymore. It's a fantastic module but I prefer the Gazelle for it's agility and thrill factor though in real life I would choose the BS every time!  The Mi8 is also special and of course I feel I have to give a shout out to the Huey haha! Need to tear myself away from the Gazelle and give the others a fair chance I think!

 

 

Yeah I have all the choppers  as well as several airplane modules, just the learning curve is so large I just have not put in the time with them to learn them. Most of my time is spent in Il-2 these days.