DCS

[Urra]

I think Normandy will only be usable in 2.0 with Vegas. Caucasus is only in 1.5. Also I think there are some aircraft that do not work in 2.0 either. Would've been great to have it all in one 2.5 but I guess that's not a priority. That's why I'm not bothering playing it until it's all unified under one game again.

 

That's one thing nobody can accuse the Il2 team of. They don't make game breaking loose ends and leave them unfixed for years.

To best of my knowledge 2.0 can only support a single map at this time.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

To best of my knowledge 2.0 can only support a single map at this time.

2.0 has a different map technology that is uncompatible with old maps like Caucasus. From what I know 2.5 started as a attempt to simply convert the existing Cacasus map to the new 2.0 technology and integrating it in the new platform.

 

While I'm also dissatisfied with the news this project got delayed further, I'm glad they are actually revamping the entire map for free.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Soon enough we will have two high quality Kuban/Caucasus maps to fly over, even if it takes a little longer than expected

[9./JG27golani79]

Also I think there are some aircraft that do not work in 2.0 either.

All aircraft are working in 2.0

[nirvi]

To best of my knowledge 2.0 can only support a single map at this time.

2.0 supports multiple maps.

1.5 only supports the old caucasus map.

 

DCS 2.5 will support multiple maps including the new caucasus and other engine improvements (PBR, deffered shading)

Edited November 14, 2016 by nirvi

[TWC_Ace]

I think I red somewhere that 2.0 is less CPU hungry than 1.5..can somebody confirm this?

[II./JG77_Manu*]

I think I red somewhere that 2.0 is less CPU hungry than 1.5..can somebody confirm this?

 

I don't have it myself, but i read/heared it in on numerous occasions, so i guess it's true. DCS 2.0 is less hungry then 1.5 Caucasus with Starway or Bartek Terrain Mod, while still looking better. Apparently slightly heavier on PC then Vanilla 1.5

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

I think I red somewhere that 2.0 is less CPU hungry than 1.5..can somebody confirm this?

 

The engine is better optimized but still isn't effectively using multithreading.

[ST_ami7b5]

2.0 supports multiple maps.

1.5 only supports the old caucasus map.

 

DCS 2.5 will support multiple maps including the new caucasus and other engine improvements (PBR, deffered shading)

 

I will get Normandy map for my backing  the kickstarter.

Will I still need to buy 2.x engine separately? 

[Guest deleted@1562]

I will get Normandy map for my backing  the kickstarter.

Will I still need to buy 2.x engine separately? 

 

No.

[ST_ami7b5]

No.

 

Thanks.

[150GCT_Veltro]

Don't forget about this beauty, G, included in the last update. We are still waiting for PFM but is really amazing. Waiting now for S. It's free if you have FC 3.0.

Edited November 15, 2016 by 150GCT_Veltro

[Gambit21]

I wish I had time to learn jets still...not even close.

[Danziger]

I wish I had time to learn jets still...not even close.

Flaming Cliffs 3 is actually pretty simplified. Easy to learn and jump into some quick action when you can steal a moment. I know how it is not having enough personal time.

[kestrel79]

I wish I had time to learn jets still...not even close.

 

I hear ya, I've had DCS for 5 years now and I still have yet to play online, do an actual mission or campaign haha. All I do is free flight or the fun tutorial missions where it teaches you how to use each system. I highly recommend them to learn the aircraft procedures as DCS is for sure more complex than ww2 sims. But the tutorials are the best in the business imo.

[9./JG27golani79]

I wish I had time to learn jets still...not even close.

 

You could start with the F-5 or MiG21

They are not that complex and don´t demand so much time like the A-10 for example.

 

Or like BorysVorobyov said - FC 3 is pretty well suited for getting started.

 

You could try out the free version of DCS - it comes with the Su-25 (not exactly sure which version - but it´s on FC3 level)

Edited November 16, 2016 by 9./JG27golani79

[150GCT_Veltro]

Also F-86 or Mig-15. It's very sad don't have a Korean map with these two aircrafts.

 

Belsimtek is terrific, it seems to fly a real one.

[9./JG27golani79]

Also F-86 or Mig-15. It's very sad don't have a Korean map with these two aircrafts.

 

Belsimtek is terrific, it seems to fly a real one.

 

Yeah, those 2 planes are quite simple but a lot of fun.

A Korean map would be very nice as well.

[CisTer-dB-]

Yeah, those 2 planes are quite simple but a lot of fun.

A Korean map would be very nice as well.

Also F-86 or Mig-15. It's very sad don't have a Korean map with these two aircrafts.

 

Belsimtek is terrific, it seems to fly a real one.

Oh yeah I am also disappointed about that. Both are gems and fun to fly

Edited November 16, 2016 by ATAG_dB

[Urra]

Oh yeah I am also disappointed about that. Both are a gem and fun to fly

I really don't understand why if the company refuses to do a full map of Korea, they won't let people do it privately. There are already hundreds or thousands of mods for the project. So it's not an program image thing, that they are afraid of, otherwise they would tighten down on the mods. Now they have almost all aircraft without theatre for many many years. How can the alternative be worse?

[Rolling_Thunder]

I really don't understand why if the company refuses to do a full map of Korea, they won't let people do it privately. There are already hundreds or thousands of mods for the project. So it's not an program image thing, that they are afraid of, otherwise they would tighten down on the mods. Now they have almost all aircraft without theatre for many many years. How can the alternative be worse?

One of the truly sad and bewildering things about ED is their refusal to release the map making tools. The lack of any tools to help the modding community really doesn't help the game. Imagine the different theatres that we could all be flying if they had released the sdk when they said they would. It takes ED years to release a map. Nttr took years and it's 90% empty desert, still in development. Still no Normandy, SoH. It's frustrations like that, that in the end will eventually drive the player base towards other titles.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

I recently updated DCS to newest version and bam, my visibility went down and I got no idea what happened. Now things easily blend with the sky, had few fights yesterday and any moment enemy aircraft pulled up I lost him (dot was only visible at closer range, but even then blended really easily). Apparently its not only me since I saw few other people complaining since last update so there must be something. I tried adjusting monitor brightness and contrast but it didnt help much and so far flying DCS is a huge pain. I know those who have 4k  monitors got it much better, but that is a completely different story 

[150GCT_Veltro]

Korea is just the best example of the nonsense of DCS policy. Modules like F-86 and Mig-15 are simple amazing, really superb, just imagine what kinde of insane immersion we could have/feel in a DX11 Korean map like Nevada.

 

We can only hope Normandy could change something in their business mission.

Edited November 16, 2016 by 150GCT_Veltro

[Rolling_Thunder]

Korea is just the best example of the nonsense of DCS policy. Modules like F-86 and Mig-15 are simple amazing, really superb, just imagine what kinde of insane immersion we could have/feel in a DX11 Korean map like Nevada.

 

We can only hope Normandy could change something in their business mission.

Hope, hope, hope. That's the thing with DCS it's all based on hope. The platform has no real direction. If everything ED has created in the past 10 years was put on a roadmap, a business plan, laid out exactly as they have progressed in reality, nobody would back them. People would ask "WTF is this [Edited]? This is your business plan? [Edited] off".

Edited November 17, 2016 by Bearcat
Profanity

[Gambit21]

To the replies above, the Mig15 or F-86 would be great, I like that idea on one hand...especially the Mig15.

On the other where do I have to fly them? Nevada against modern fighters and ground vehicles? That's my hang up.

I'll consider F3, or even the MiG21...but I already get sidelong glances when I fire up BoS after spending hours on the computer doing work.

 

I purchased the Dora a while back but have seen no compelling reason to bother downloading DCS at this point given my time constraints.

 

 

 

 

.

[9./JG27golani79]

I recently updated DCS to newest version and bam, my visibility went down and I got no idea what happened. Now things easily blend with the sky, had few fights yesterday and any moment enemy aircraft pulled up I lost him (dot was only visible at closer range, but even then blended really easily). Apparently its not only me since I saw few other people complaining since last update so there must be something. I tried adjusting monitor brightness and contrast but it didnt help much and so far flying DCS is a huge pain. I know those who have 4k  monitors got it much better, but that is a completely different story 

 

That´s weird as with the latest update the spotting should have improved - sure there is room for improvement but it is better than before.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Not for me man, I really got it worse than before. Before the last week patch I had no problem tracking targets on sky, now everything blends and vanishes. I will have to work that out somehow, maybe some tweaks in nvidia inspector will help as well. 

[Danziger]

I never saw the point of the Nevada map to begin with. What fighting ever took place there? It's just a training ground. Do you really want to use a simulator to fly "simulated" dogfights? They should've focused on making the Normandy map for WW2, a Korea map, and a Cold War European "what if" map for the more modern jets. They could let third parties do maps as paid DLC. Oh well. Maybe DCS will be ready by the time I retire so I'll have plenty of time to learn the planes.

[CisTer-dB-]

I never saw the point of the Nevada map to begin with. What fighting ever took place there? It's just a training ground. Do you really want to use a simulator to fly "simulated" dogfights? They should've focused on making the Normandy map for WW2, a Korea map, and a Cold War European "what if" map for the more modern jets. They could let third parties do maps as paid DLC. Oh well. Maybe DCS will be ready by the time I retire so I'll have plenty of time to learn the planes.

I think it was a long time promise map that came (supose to) with the A10. It was long but the did delivered.

Like they say DCS is a study sim not combat sim. I wish it was the later

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Nevada was decided on back when the A-10C was in development and intendet for a training campaign. Technical issues however meant that map development got stuck and buyers were left with only half their purchase.

 

Third parties are seemingly developing more scenerie (Letherneck works on pacific and VEAO on a Duxfort map) but little to no information regarding those are availabel.

[Danziger]

Leatherneck is also supposed to be releasing a map to go with the Viggen as well. We will see.

[Blooddawn1942]

And Not to forget the Strait of Hormuz map, which we will eventually see by The end of 2017.

[Lusekofte]

Personally I followed the startup training for the A 10 C about 10 times in 2 days before I left for work 2 weeks, now I manage to start it up 2 weeks later. As long as it is logical and you know why and what you do it, it is possible to remember.

 

Spendt about the same amount of time to start up the KA 50, both are marvellous. The KA 50 I can inside out now. I hope to say the same about the A 10 in a year or two

Edited November 17, 2016 by 216th_LuseKofte

[150GCT_Veltro]

A question about K4 Mk-108/30. I know baout mods, but do you know why there are not tracers at all for Mk-108? Is it historicall correct?

[Sokol1]

 "Press E"

 

 

Too much "what if" in that startup. 

Edited November 23, 2016 by Sokol1

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

It's magnificent. 

[Feathered_IV]

I got bored and skipped to the end after a couple of minutes. I guess those click-pits just really aren't for me.

[Finkeren]

I love it. Not the click-pit part itself - that I'll never get used to - but the fidelity of modelling and the quality of rendering really is second-to-none.

 

Just too bad, that we can't have a planeset of 30 contemporary aircraft with a matching set of maps and ground objects.

[Lusekofte]

Believe me, you would not fly DCS without click pits , it would take a year to remember all the features without it. (press  [shift][alt][tab][enter][2]for aligning the radar)

Clickable pits make it possible to do the complexity DCS have, and do it with the minimum of training. If you do not like complexity it is still fun to fly the less complex FC3 planes. DCS is the only game I do not use the WW2 part, since I do not care for fighters. I own them, an probably will own this too

[ZachariasX]

I like them, I find it very immersive if you can click the switches. It's nice for just for procedures and flying the aircraft. It also makes it possible to map only like 10 functions or so on the Joystick. As a casual flyer, I consatntly forget all the keys I'.ve maped for the different DCS jets.

 

Clickspots for sure don't help while getting shot top pieces on WoL.

Believe me, you would not fly DCS without click pits , it would take a year to remember all the features without it. (press  [shift][alt][tab][enter][2]for aligning the radar)

Clickable pits make it possible to do the complexity DCS have, and do it with the minimum of training. If you do not like complexity it is still fun to fly the less complex FC3 planes. DCS is the only game I do not use the WW2 part, since I do not care for fighters. I own them, an probably will own this too

 

Ah, you made a mistake there. It is:

 

press [L shift][L alt][tab][enter][2]for aligning the radar