DCS

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, BeastyBaiter said:

Agreed. The missions I make for my tutorials are generally empty other than the specific items needed for the video. This is deliberate as I want to remove as much randomness and distraction as possible. It is very easy to liven things up in the editor though. In general, I don't think there is any substantial difference between BoX and DCS when it comes to how lively the missions can be. The DCS editor is vastly easier to use though. I really don't know why BoX/RoF uses the style of editor it does.

 

Thanks Beasty,

 

Regarding BoX editor - It was never meant to be publicly available originally. It’s vastly more powerful than the DCS editor, but more difficult to learn. I wouldn’t trade it as I can get it to do just about anything you can think of. DCS editor is simpler but limited by comparison.

 

If I get the raw materials I might make a DCS campaign down the road. I really like the idea of Red Flag or Top Gun type scenarios. If there were more Red Flag missions available for the F-15 (rather than one campaign only last time I looked) I might be in already. 

 

Content is a big problem.

[SYN_Haashashin]

Hi all,

 

This is DCS news topic, not IL2 FMB (ME) topic, keep it that way. All off topic will be deleted.

 

Also remember that negativity, constant one of course, is not welcome in this forums. 

 

Haash

 

 

[Monostripezebra]

 

 

Edited July 11, 2018 by Monostripezebra

[dburne]

Lol awesome vid, I love it!

[Trooper117]

lol... great stuff!

[LukeFF]

https://www.polygon.com/2018/7/13/17570028/modern-air-combat-eagle-dynamics-announcement-price-release-date

 

 

[DD_Arthur]

Excellent!  This must be the Flaming Cliffs 4 thing. 

 

'Fraid I'm one of those terrible people who like FC3 and don't like clickable pits and will therefore buy this and enjoy it for what it is   

[dburne]

Wow that is interesting, and here I thought they were getting away from those level of aircraft.

Should be exciting.

[Gambit21]

Might be indicative of a long term course correction on their part - I hope so.

[BeastyBaiter]

F-4E effectively cancelled (indefinite hold), they decided to do the F-16C Block 50 instead. Current ED + former BST timeline looks like this (according to Wags):

 

1) F/A-18C (currently open alpha)

2) Yak-52 (we've seen pics of it)

3) Mi-24P (no pics or vids yet but in development since F-5E release)

4) F-16C (no info)

5) AH-1S (no info)

6) F-4E (very early WIP pics shown last year, now on hold until several of the above are completed)

 

That isn't necessarily an exact ordering, my guess is the Mi-24 is being developed entirely separately from the other current projects and work on the AH-1 is unlikely to even begin until it's near completion.

 

Sources:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3562495&postcount=5

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3564035&postcount=14440

Edited July 14, 2018 by BeastyBaiter

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Is anyone else confused by this Modern Air Combat announcement?

 

It seems that there will now be a simplified module parallel to usual DCS aircraft. I struggle to understand how they will coexist.

Quote

includes a limited part of our Nevada and Persian Gulf maps.

Very strange.

Quote

Purchase MAC aircraft individually or as a pack at a reduced price.

Even more clutter in the store. Now, you potentially have to buy the same aircraft twice. 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2018 by Mitthrawnuruodo

[BeastyBaiter]

You don't have to buy the same plane twice if you don't want to. If you have the full fidelity one, there is no point in buying the simplified one. Alternatively, if you are a new player and get this new pack, you don't have to buy the full fidelity version of it later if you don't want to. With that said, I'm surprised they are doing this. I was expecting new aircraft instead of simplified versions of third party aircraft. This is doubly true since 2 of them are orphan planes.

[Alexmarine]

I also saw that in MAC they listed the Su-25T. Are they gonna cut it as a free plane?

 

A little sad about the fate of the F-4E, it could have been used for a lot of scenarios and mission types. Maybe they want to tackle it after other two-seater planes are finally developed (like the F-14)...

 

Good news is that the F-16 will be moved earlier and as I am playing around with Falcon BMS nowadays I would like to see the Viper in a modern engine with up to date UI and Controls. Still I think that by the time we will see the first wip-screenshot I will be half-way in learning how to fly BMS's one ?

[BeastyBaiter]

Dunno, it would be very strange if they did. It's normally considered an FC3 aircraft even if free, so maybe that's what they meant? Regarding the F-4 and F-16. I know a lot are looking forwards to the viper, but to me it's just a single engined Hornet. It uses the same weapons in the same way with a roughly comparable plane made by the same nation in the same time period. I can't say I was terribly enthusiastic about the F-4 either from a flying standpoint since I dislike 2 seat fighters, but I was looking forwards to fighting it in the MiG-21 and upcoming MiG-23. The plane fills a gap in the western lineup between the bare bones F-5 and the far more advanced aircraft. I feel like the F-16 just doesn't add anything to the game. I'm sure it will sell well, which is why ED bumped it up the list, but I do wonder how common my thoughts on it are. I can imagine an awful lot of people buying either the Hornet or Viper but not both who would have bought one of those plus the F-4 since it is of a different era and role (light fighter vs heavy fighter).

 

At least the lovely Mi-24 seems to be next on the list, ignoring the little Yak-52 side project that will likely turn up in the next few months.

[Alexmarine]

It is fun because I actually prefer the fact that the Viper is a single engine plane compared to the Hornet ?

 

About two seaters I am with you, but indeed the F-4E would have filled so many vacant spot in the line up and such an iconic plane that I am sad to see it postponed... 

 

 

[fiddlinjim]

Looking forward to the MAC from DCS with the accent on modern fighters. 

I like the WWII fighters with their lack of complexity but don't enjoy the learning curve for the modern planes.

 

[Feathered_IV]

If I was after an all-in-one package of incompatible aircraft, this would certainly be it.

[CanadaOne]

14 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

Excellent!  This must be the Flaming Cliffs 4 thing. 

 

'Fraid I'm one of those terrible people who like FC3 and don't like clickable pits and will therefore buy this and enjoy it for what it is   

 

 

All those planes at a more simplified level? Love it!

[BeastyBaiter]

Well, it's really just 5 planes that got simplified versions (F-5, MiG-21, F-86, MiG-15 and L-39). All the modern jets in the pack are a copy paste of FC3 according to ED. Simplifying the others doesn't change much either. Once you get past engine startup, which can be done for you with windows + home I think, there really isn't anything to simplify.

[Danziger]

Are they adding mouse aim? The trailer says it can be played with a keyboard and mouse.

[BeastyBaiter]

Probably mouse joy, like BoX has.

[Gambit21]

On 7/14/2018 at 6:33 AM, Feathered_IV said:

If I was after an all-in-one package of incompatible aircraft, this would certainly be it.

 

Yep.

For a minute I was thinking there would be a bunch of new content with this release, campaigns etc.

 

They need an "Air Show Pilot" release, with a crowd, grandstands, static displays, and soundtracks that you can fly an airshow demonstration to.

Let's face it, this is where DCS can really shine.

 

There is a PATHETICALLY small number of campaigns available, especially considering how "user friendly" the DCS mission builder is.

With all the whining about this editor compared to the BoX editor, I'd expect there to be pages and pages of campaigns available.

[Rolling_Thunder]

Don't all the high fidelity aircraft, mig 21 etc, have an easy mode anyway? Please correct me if im wrong, but if i recall correctly,  its been a while, DCS like BoX has options to tune down the "high fidelity". There's really nothing there for existing customers. Why spend time watering down some of their existing modules when a FC level ah-64 or FC level F16 would sell many many more modules. I don't get it. It seems arse about tit to me. Make and sell a FC ah-64, then upgrade and sell it as a high fidelity module. Get twice the money. I have most of those modules and have no reason to purchase them at a lower fidelity.

Makes zero sense.

[Danziger]

So with the MiG-21 are they like taking that over from the 3rd party developer or what? Did Leatherneck give them right to use their model in this new thing and the original Leatherneck MiG-21 will still be separate? So there is nothing new they just are repackaging FC3 and some other shit and calling it a new module?

[=FEW=Hauggy]

Wow the exact same game is getting released one more time to create more cash out of thin air with existing content, how uninteresting and absolutely not exciting.

Same planes and same maps as DCS exept they're smaller and you can play with keyboard and mouse instead of a joystick...

Edited July 17, 2018 by =FEW=Hauggy

[Alexmarine]

Yeah, I already own FC3 and at least the MiG-15 as a full fidelity module. After it I can't even consider switching back to simplified planes (especially when there is a full version of them available) in DCS. New people will surely enjoy it but I don't see how they can sell it to existing customers... If they went for creating some new simplified planes to complement the already existing ones they could have generated some more interest honestly...

[Danziger]

2 minutes ago, Alexmarine28 said:

Yeah, I already own FC3 and at least the MiG-15 as a full fidelity module. After it I can't even consider switching back to simplified planes (especially when there is a full version of them available) in DCS. New people will surely enjoy it but I don't see how they can sell it to existing customers... If they went for creating some new simplified planes to complement the already existing ones they could have generated some more interest honestly...

It's just a quick money grab to get new people interested. They want some of the WT and IL*2 customers. The easiest thing to do was release simplified versions of existing modules and rereleasing FC3 planes with it I guess. Low hanging fruit and whatnot. The only actual new thing I see is the mouse aim stuff. Everything else is already available. 

[dburne]

I am sure they are seeing a market to justify doing a FC4, and obviously for most of us here we would not really be in that market.

[nirvi]

1 hour ago, dburne said:

I am sure they are seeing a market to justify doing a FC4, and obviously for most of us here we would not really be in that market.

FC3 is the most successful DCS module, so yes, there is a big market for MAC.

[Danziger]

I just don't see how they can add a couple of simplified existing planes to FC3 and call it something new. So is FC3 no longer going to be available?

[Sokol1]

19 hours ago, Rolling_Thunder said:

Don't all the high fidelity aircraft, mig 21 etc, have an easy mode anyway?

 

Yes, Mig-21BIS (and most modules) have a GAME mode, an shortcut for run an engine start script (like in Bo'X) = Ctrl+HOME and can by fly with keybaord.

 

 

[Bremspropeller]

On ‎6‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 7:59 AM, ZachariasX said:

 

…

 

 

Very much spot-on.

The most important difference between real life and sim-flying is that you are actually going places (moving around; the sensation of movement totally lacks in sims), which is a little intimidating at first. Especially when you first fly an aiplane yohave flown thousands of time in the sim.

 

What also is totally different is the way the controls FEEL. They're a good deal harder to move, but mostly they're rather responsive (depends a lot on the airplane, though).

A Pa 28 Warrior will have a brickton-heavy (but very direct) Elevator. A Cessna 210 will have you sit at the runway with your legs aching, because that goddam Thing is so heavy on the rudder (sucks butt to taxi) and the other controls aren't any lighter. But once in the air, she responds at the slightest movement of the yoke. Oh and she's Pretty powerfol - 300hp don't seem like much, but this thing is fun (well, sadly not for your wallet).

 

The *flying* part is actually pretty straightforward - it's the shell around it that gets you behind the aircraft. When I did my IR, I didn't have much fun FLYING, but I sure as hell enjoyed being challenged by the mental task of knowing where you are and where you're supposed to go and the relation between those two.

[Rolling_Thunder]

Im all for FC level aircraft. Ive been hoping for years that they would produce more of them. I wish that somebody would produce a FC package of Vietnam era aircraft. A-6, A-4, F-8, A-1, mig17, mig 19.  The idea of watering down whats already available and reselling what most people own already seems very strange to me.

[DD_Arthur]

6 hours ago, nirvi said:

FC3 is the most successful DCS module, so yes, there is a big market for MAC.

 

Yep, I'll buy it.  FC3 level is enough for me.  

I know, I know.....I'm a bad man......

[dburne]

2 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

 

Yep, I'll buy it.  FC3 level is enough for me.  

I know, I know.....I'm a bad man......

 

Nah, nothing wrong with supporting the genre. It is small enough as is and needs our support wherever we can.

I eagerly support both sims.

Edited July 17, 2018 by dburne

[JG5_Zesphr]

im looking forward to it tbh, only concentration on the harrier, the simplified thing will allow them easier to and hopefully cheaper to take out for a spin. especially the MiG-21 and L 39

[OrLoK]

Box, for me, wins it.

 

ww2,ww1,tanks.

 

it also seems to perform better for me in VR.

 

I love DCS but it feels a little sterile for me SP wise.

[CanadaOne]

Morning,

 

I'm running DCS with 8GB of RAM, and I do get some obvious slowdowns with terrain loading and all that. Is having 16GB something that might help with this? My video card is a 1060 3GB, which I realize is good, but not great.

 

I can't afford a 1070 for several months, but a stick of RAM is $100. I can eat that. Would that extra 8GB help with DCS performance?

 

Thanks.

[Wolf8312]

9 minutes ago, CanadaOne said:

Morning,

 

I'm running DCS with 8GB of RAM, and I do get some obvious slowdowns with terrain loading and all that. Is having 16GB something that might help with this? My video card is a 1060 3GB, which I realize is good, but not great.

 

I can't afford a 1070 for several months, but a stick of RAM is $100. I can eat that. Would that extra 8GB help with DCS performance?

 

Thanks.

 

I think so Canada, I see people on the DCS forums even saying 32 GB and I think that is presently the recommended amount on the store page (dont quote me on that) though most people who have tested say usage never gets above 16. But yes at least 16 I think...

Edited July 23, 2018 by Wolf8312

[CanadaOne]

Thanks. Yeah, I should check out the forums there.

 

But I prefer the forums here.