DCS

[InProgress]

1 hour ago, -IRRE-Therion said:

most of the NH90 are grounded and are not allowed to be used* - at least in good old Germany.

Everything is grounded in germany

 

1 hour ago, BeastyBaiter said:

It's largely unknown outside western Europe, much like the Z-19 is unknown outside China. The production numbers say it all, around 300 NH90's built vs 4,000 UH-60's, 4,500 MD-500's, 2,000 AH-64's, 17,000 Mi-8/17's, 2,500 Mi-24's and so on. The NH90 is a very rare bird. Also, the above parts issue grounding tons of them.

I would not compare numbers of helis like mi8 or md500 or even mi24. Completly diffrent things, transport, light and attack helicopter. I said i counted on nh90 and uh60 because i really want utility helicopter in this game. Mi8 kind of fits but how old is that thing in compare to nh90? C'mon, it makes no sense to compare most of stuff you said with nh90, it was put in production in 2006 not 1960. We are not at war, we don't need to mass produce these now, if anything they will just slowly replace them. NH90 can have nice future if things work out, they are still making them and if they fix some problems then maybe some countries order more of them.

 

It's a shame they canceled it. Still i really want uh60, even more than nh90. Afghanistan map + uh60 would be amazing.

Edited October 13, 2018 by InProgress

[Danziger]

UH-60 would definitely get me flying in DCS.

[Gambit21]

I’d be all over the F-15 Red Flag campaign - but aside from time constraints I’m not going to download and install the latest build for one campaign. 

 

As much as certain people have gone on and on about how much easier the DCS mission builder is to use - you’d think there would be pages and pages of campaigns.

 

This nicely illustrates the other main problem with DCS aside from aircraft development decisions - content for the aircraft and maps that actually do match each other.

 

This why the F-14 trailer brings on a giant eye-roll with me. After the hype from the trailer production value wears off, and the novelty of a new aircraft is gone...(and you finish what meager content is released) you’ll be sitting on another expensive module and nothing much to do with it.

 

 

I have a Dora that’s useless.

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, InProgress said:

Mi8 kind of fits but how old is that thing in compare to nh90? C'mon

 

A very effective transport, cheap compared to Western choppers . It is really the best choice as a first for this type

[InProgress]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

This nicely illustrates the other main problem with DCS aside from aircraft development decisions - content for the aircraft and maps that actually do match each other.

 

 This why the F-14 trailer brings on a giant eye-roll with me. After the hype from the trailer production value wears off, and the novelty of a new aircraft is gone...(and you finish what meager content is released) you’ll be sitting on another expensive module and nothing much to do with it.

I think there is going to be Afghanistan map and syria in 2019. 

[Jade_Monkey]

On 10/8/2018 at 5:01 PM, Gambit21 said:

Six words that encapsulate why I don't bother with modern jet's anymore.

 

That's my issue with DCS. Too much time to ramp up every time. I like to play all planes, so im not sticking to one for months.

 

In IL2 I barely have to remember plane-specific bindings, it's all fun from the beginning.

[Bremspropeller]

5 hours ago, InProgress said:

You should if you are from europe. Quite a few countries here use it and it's still in production. It's kind of like Black hawk of europe.

 

...which is fitting, as the NH90 is "down" most of the time....

2 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

This why the F-14 trailer brings on a giant eye-roll with me. After the hype from the trailer production value wears off, and the novelty of a new aircraft is gone...(and you finish what meager content is released) you’ll be sitting on another expensive module and nothing much to do with it.

 

 

I have a Dora that’s useless.

 

Well, you can use the MiG-29 to prepare for the F-14 handling-wise, as aerodynamically and flight-control architecture-wise they are relatively similar (note: I didn't say "entirely").

You'll get some play-time out of that.

 

That still won't give you a more exciting map, though - although I have to say the Strait of Hormuz is slowly gathering my interest.

You could actualy fly IIRAF and have MiG-29s and F-14s join forces. Eat that, Saddam!

 

 

I see the warbirds (I only have the Dora and the P-51 - no iterest in the Messercrap and Crapfire) as study-level aircraft, which are systems-wise beyond IL-2, but not quite up to (well, some might debate that) AccuSim level. It's all about having the correct size of glitter shades with you.

[dburne]

2 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

That's my issue with DCS. Too much time to ramp up every time. I like to play all planes, so im not sticking to one for months.

 

In IL2 I barely have to remember plane-specific bindings, it's all fun from the beginning.

 

Yep that is indeed one big difference.

I already own way more DCS Modules than I will ever have time to fully learn.

But the ones I have done so with, are incredibly fun.

 

[DetCord12B]

On 10/12/2018 at 1:58 AM, ram0506 said:

Maybe by Polychop-Simulations?

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=197704

 

 

Polychop is hit and miss at best. They should fix what they've already sold.

 

On 10/12/2018 at 4:50 AM, Pb_Cybermat47 said:

 

Seconded, I once spoke to a Kiowa combat veteran. Apparently it’s so small that it can drop in between buildings on a street and open up with the MGs.

 

They provided CAS to us on numerous occasions, so I have a special place in my heart for that bird and the crews that drive them.

[InProgress]

13 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

...which is fitting, as the NH90 is "down" most of the time....

It's not NH90 fault that europe, especially germay is pathetic and their military is a joke. It would not be grounded if they would afford its maintenance instead of giving free money to their new citzens. DCS is not simulating pathetic military of some european countries, it's a cool machine and i would love to see it in game. This game really needs utility helicopter for NATO side. This is my point from the beginning, "Red" side got mi8 which fits them, "blue" has what? Huey?

 

Again, my first wish would be black hawk, but i saw them making nh90 which is also cool, it was cancelled which is sad. Now we stay with no modern utility helicopter for NATO.

This is what i hate in DCS, bunch of random stuff that makes no sense. It's like il2 would make stalingrad map only and then keep adding planes like zero, f16, me262 etc. They don't seem  to have any plan whatsoever...

 

I will probably get huey to fly around for fun when i get new pc and hope one day i can updrade to black hawk and fly medevac missions in afghanistan. They really need to add some career mode for no MP people.

[Wolf8312]

20 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

That's my issue with DCS. Too much time to ramp up every time. I like to play all planes, so im not sticking to one for months.

 

In IL2 I barely have to remember plane-specific bindings, it's all fun from the beginning.

 

You know you can set each plane to 'hot start' and take off without doing anything pretty much. Watch a you tube video and learn the weapon systems in about ten minutes (there is one great tutorial which will teach you in about a minute!) with most planes. Missions can also be tweaked in the editor to the users specification. DCS can be as easy, or as complex as the user wants it to be really. Though it does require some effort in the beginning. The ironic thing is I actually play DCS as more of the casual arcade game (blowing stuff up and just enjoying flight) whereas with BOX missions/campaign I am in it for the long haul.

 

Realistic flight models are complimented best by realistic systems with which to control them, and a huge part of what makes a flight sim so immersive. I think people just allow themselves to be intimidated by DCS, and think of it all in terms of tedious hard work, when actually learning the modules is, or should be a huge part of what makes learning how to fly a plane, or a helicopter, so fun, and rewarding. As with any studying (and DCS does involve study) the hardest thing is pushing yourself to actually sit down and learn, but if you force yourself to do this, you will probably find it very enjoyable eventually.

 

I love BOX for the campaign, and in that aspect DCS does not come close at the moment (though there are great missions and campaigns out there) but for the planes themselves, the feel and physics, the challenge, and reward of learning how to fly/land and fight, DCS is definately superior IMO.

 

Dont have to remember plane specific bindings much in DCS though as its mostly clickable. As long as you have a HOTAS there should be no bindings. If anything there are more bindings to remember with BOX especially if you dont know your way around the AC in the beginning. Unless you were comparing IL2 WW2 planes, to the jets of DCS, but that wouldnt be a fair comparison.

 

WW2 planes in DCS are really very easy to learn even from a cold start, as there are only about 5 or six different steps to remember and unlike with the jets you will remember what to do after your first tutorial.

 

 

Edited October 14, 2018 by Wolf8312

[wowbagger]

I'm thinking about picking up a module or two the next time they go on sale. But I'm seriously concerned about two things - 1) unfixed/ newly introduced bugs , 2) lack of anything to do with them.
 

The Mig-15, Mig-21, and Mirage are on my list. I'm not really a big fan of modern jets and I'd rather spend my sim-minutes looking out the widows instead of staring at MFDs. I know the Mirage is a bit modern and all, but it looks so pretty and high alt/fast birds appeal more, since, in my opinion, ground pounding in DCS looks ugly, not fluid, and unappealing - the DCS world looks lovely and more realistic from high up, less so from down low.

 

In the 90s I played the crap out of F/A-18 and A-10 Cuba on a Macintosh LC II. Some years ago I eventually picked up the A-10 on sale for DCS but can't bring myself to study, forget, study again, forget again all the systems, buttons ..etc.  I tried the F-18 free weekend (very glad DCS started doing those, hope they keep it up) and pretty quickly decided it's not my thing.

 

But all the videos and description of the two Migs and the Mirage (plus the frequent endorsement of their campaigns) still seem very appealing. My concern is that some folks call the modules 'broken'. Others disagree. Also I understand there are a couple of campaigns for the Mirage, and the Guardian of the Caucasus for the Fishbed, but some people in the DCS forums say the campaigns aren't working after the various engine updates. It's hard to get a handle on what the current state of these things is. I assume the Museum Relic campaign still works, since ED is still collecting money for it (perhaps that's naive?).

 

If the only working option to fly these awesome looking planes is to "set em up and knock em down" with the mission editor ... meh, I can't see myself doing that ... at all. But if they come with at least one decent campaign,  I'd jump in during a sale. I have zero interest for multiplayer in flight sims - for me it's about the immersion in the environment and the moment. I have Rise of Storm Vietnam with which to scratch the multiplayer itch and drink beer online with my buddies from afar.

 

Can anyone give me an updated, educated take of the current viability of these modules for single-player purposes? I would be very much obliged.

 

Cheers 

Edited October 14, 2018 by Pudu

[Monostripezebra]

Just some more "edgy" Huey..

 

 

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, Pudu said:

I'm thinking about picking up a module or two the next time they go on sale. But I'm seriously concerned about two things - 1) unfixed/ newly introduced bugs , 2) lack of anything to do with them.
 

The Mig-15, Mig-21, and Mirage are on my list. I'm not really a big fan of modern jets and I'd rather spend my sim-minutes looking out the widows instead of staring at MFDs. I know the Mirage is a bit modern and all, but it looks so pretty and high alt/fast birds appeal more, since, in my opinion, ground pounding in DCS looks ugly, not fluid, and unappealing - the DCS world looks lovely and more realistic from high up, less so from down low.

 

In the 90s I played the crap out of F/A-18 and A-10 Cuba on a Macintosh LC II. Some years ago I eventually picked up the A-10 on sale for DCS but can't bring myself to study, forget, study again, forget again all the systems, buttons ..etc. And the I tried the F-18 free weekend (very glad DCS started doing those, hope they keep it up) and pretty quickly decided it's not my thing.

 

But all the videos and description of the two Migs and the Mirage (plus the frequent endorsement of their campaigns) still seem very appealing. My concern is that some folks call the modules 'broken'. Others disagree. Also I understand there are a couple of campaigns for the Mirage, and the Guardian of the Caucasus for the Fishbed, but some people in the DCS forums say the campaigns aren't working after the various engine updates. It's hard to get a handle on what the current state of these things is. I assume the Museum Relic campaign still works, since ED is still collecting money for it (perhaps that's naive?).

 

If the only working option to fly these awesome looking planes is to "set em up and knock em down" with the mission editor ... meh, I can't see myself doing that ... at all. But if they come with at least one decent campaign,  I'd jump in during a sale. I have zero interest for multiplayer in flight sims - for me it's about the immersion in the environment and the moment. I have Rise of Storm Vietnam with which to scratch the multiplayer itch and drink beer online with my buddies from afar.

 

Can anyone give me an updated, educated take of the current viability of these modules for single-player purposes? I would be very much obliged.

 

Cheers 

 

No Korea on the way - that pretty much negates the MiG 15 and Sabre (and all the money and work put into them)  unless you're into online Air-Quake.

It's a shame, but that's how they're doing things over there.

[Legioneod]

4 hours ago, Wolf8312 said:

...

This really only works for simple aircraft anf for aircraft that you don't really need to know the systems very well. If you try doing this in the A-10 you'll be pretty frustrated since it has quite a few systems and functions you really need to know. Funny thing is startup is the easiest process to learn, so if you're not willing to learn the simplest of functions then DCS probably isn't for you. (I don't mean you specifically, just people in general)

 

3 hours ago, Pudu said:

I'm thinking about picking up a module or two the next time they go on sale. But I'm seriously concerned about two things - 1) unfixed/ newly introduced bugs , 2) lack of anything to do with them.
 

The Mig-15, Mig-21, and Mirage are on my list. I'm not really a big fan of modern jets and I'd rather spend my sim-minutes looking out the widows instead of staring at MFDs. I know the Mirage is a bit modern and all, but it looks so pretty and high alt/fast birds appeal more, since, in my opinion, ground pounding in DCS looks ugly, not fluid, and unappealing - the DCS world looks lovely and more realistic from high up, less so from down low.

 

Mig-15 is a pretty fun aircraft, but with DCS poor visibility and lack of any real scenarios I don't recommend it at this point in time.

 

Mig-21 is excellent despite some of it's bugs (mostly to do with it's radar), I still think it's one of the most enjoyable aircraft I've ever bought for DCS and I highly recommend it. You might have a hard time enjoying it if you want to do A/A missions due to it's lack of contemporary enemies, we'll have to wait for the F-4 Phantom for that. But if you enjoy bombing or fast strike missions then the Mig-21 is very fun to fly and rather easy to learn.

Only gripe I have with the Mig-21 is no enemy aircraft to really fight, and the radar acts up and it's mostly useless from my experience.

 

I own the Mirage but I haven't flown it much so I can't give a real good review of it. It's capable in A/A against the aircraft we have now but it's not the best compared to the American aircraft. It's bombing capabilities are nice I think but I haven't done much of that so I'm not sure.

 

The only one I can recommend without a shadow of a doubt is the Mig-21, but with the lack of contemporary aircraft to fight against I don't fly it as much as I'd like.

 

I highly recommend learning he A-10C again, it's hard to master but it's very rewarding imo.

[wowbagger]

1 hour ago, Legioneod said:

... Mig-15 is a pretty fun aircraft, but with DCS poor visibility and lack of any real scenarios I don't recommend it at this point in time.

...

The only one I can recommend without a shadow of a doubt is the Mig-21, but with the lack of contemporary aircraft to fight against I don't fly it as much as I'd like...

 

Thanks much for your reply, and especially the info about the 21's radar. It's still at the top of my list and if the right sale comes along I will likely grab it, if only because it looks so great and seems like it would be a blast to fly. I hope the Guardians of the Caucasus will still mostly work by that point.

 

4 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

No Korea on the way - that pretty much negates the MiG 15 and Sabre (and all the money and work put into them)  unless you're into online Air-Quake.

It's a shame, but that's how they're doing things over there.

 

  I could even buy into a fictional Korea scenario using the bog standard map (man, they have really milked that terrain for a lot of years now), if such a thing existed. The thing that worries me is that so many people say DCS is great fun to make your own missions and play them. And yet, after a fair few years,  the number of user made campaigns seems frightfully small (non-existent in some cases) compared the amount that was available for IL-2 1946 (and previous incarnations) by this point in the game's evolution. I guess if the missions get broken every time the game is updated it puts a damper on creative juices.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Pudu

[Gambit21]

23 minutes ago, Pudu said:

 

 And yet, after a fair few years,  the number of user made campaigns seems frightfully small (non-existent in some cases)

 

Yep

[Gambit21]

...or DCS produced campaigns for that matter.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

I've purcheased MiG-29 due to hype over PFM and desire to try more advanced jet than F-86 / MiG-15 / MiG-21bis. It looks good, though cockpit could get some improved textures. But flying experience so far is mediocre for me, I dont know if its fly by wire or great difference to older machines, but it doesnt give me that much positive feeling and feedback as MiG-21bis or MiG-15. 

It's much faster obviously, has far better missiles and I still have much to learn but I was hoping for a bit more in terms of flying experience. 

[Lusekofte]

Some planes got a fair deal of campaigns, others just the one. But to me it is currently enough to have fun. I do not know why, but the campaign and SP in general is much more interesting than in GB series. To me at least. Well I look forward to Havoc over Caucasus , but so far I only enjoyed  Seadragons in this game as a Campaign, I am not saying this for critique toward GB, it is currently how I feel about it. 

I am an expert in forgetting modules after a while , but again the learning process is one of the things I appreciate . But  to be real good in one module , I think one have to more or less stick to it at all times

[Sokol1]

5 hours ago, Pudu said:

The thing that worries me is that so many people say DCS is great fun to make your own missions and play them. And yet, after a fair few years,  the number of user made campaigns seems frightfully small (non-existent in some cases) 

 

Probable the majority of that user made missions are just air star for  blow up stuff on ground just ahead, why they say "great fun".

 

 

[Ehret]

23 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

It's much faster obviously, has far better missiles and I still have much to learn but I was hoping for a bit more in terms of flying experience. 

 

For just flying jets are simpler than propellers, imho - no prop-wash, no p-factor and little if at all torque. The ones equip with fly-by-wire are even more, so.

After watching many DCS jet videos I have concluded that the nonstop moaning due excessive G-forces involved is not a fun, for me, either.

Edited October 15, 2018 by Ehret

[Danziger]

20 hours ago, Legioneod said:

This really only works for simple aircraft anf for aircraft that you don't really need to know the systems very well. If you try doing this in the A-10 you'll be pretty frustrated since it has quite a few systems and functions you really need to know. Funny thing is startup is the easiest process to learn, so if you're not willing to learn the simplest of functions then DCS probably isn't for you. (I don't mean you specifically, just people in general)

 

 

Mig-15 is a pretty fun aircraft, but with DCS poor visibility and lack of any real scenarios I don't recommend it at this point in time.

 

Mig-21 is excellent despite some of it's bugs (mostly to do with it's radar), I still think it's one of the most enjoyable aircraft I've ever bought for DCS and I highly recommend it. You might have a hard time enjoying it if you want to do A/A missions due to it's lack of contemporary enemies, we'll have to wait for the F-4 Phantom for that. But if you enjoy bombing or fast strike missions then the Mig-21 is very fun to fly and rather easy to learn.

Only gripe I have with the Mig-21 is no enemy aircraft to really fight, and the radar acts up and it's mostly useless from my experience.

 

I own the Mirage but I haven't flown it much so I can't give a real good review of it. It's capable in A/A against the aircraft we have now but it's not the best compared to the American aircraft. It's bombing capabilities are nice I think but I haven't done much of that so I'm not sure.

 

The only one I can recommend without a shadow of a doubt is the Mig-21, but with the lack of contemporary aircraft to fight against I don't fly it as much as I'd like.

 

I highly recommend learning he A-10C again, it's hard to master but it's very rewarding imo.

I enjoy using the MiG-21 as it was originally intended. Intercepting B-52s is pretty fun for a while.

[Lusekofte]

3 hours ago, Danziger said:

The only one I can recommend without a shadow of a doubt is the Mig-21, but with the lack of contemporary aircraft to fight against I don't fly it as much as I'd like.

 

 

I think I like the Mig 21 even more than the SU 25´s . I only flew it offline and had no use of the radar , but it simply its gorgeous. It is one plane I relate to, read a lot about it and even if I do not fly it much . I cannot think of having DCS without it. Being neighbor to the country of Viggen , it bring pretty much the same feeling and usage

[Semor76]

The new flight model for the Mig-29 is official!

 

...and I must say, its a bit...well...ehhhm....different

[Bremspropeller]

On 10/15/2018 at 6:32 AM, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

But flying experience so far is mediocre for me, I dont know if its fly by wire or great difference to older machines, but it doesnt give me that much positive feeling and feedback as MiG-21bis or MiG-15. 

 

No FBW on 9.12 and 9.13 MiG-29s.

 

The new flight-model is great.

[LLv24_SukkaVR]

Does the M2K campaign work these days? I tried it earlier this year but had a lot of problems with and it felt like every patch broke something up. Constant problems with radios and triggers.

[Bremspropeller]

Some reading on the MiG:

 

http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/aircraft/ussr/mikoyangurevitch/mig-29/gaf-t-o-1f-mig29-1-flight-manual-mig-29.html

[Gambit21]

One of the best, most effective, bang for the buck aircraft ever produced by anyone.

 

 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

6 hours ago, NahkaSukka said:

Does the M2K campaign work these days? I tried it earlier this year but had a lot of problems with and it felt like every patch broke something up. Constant problems with radios and triggers.

 

I played it some two months ago, it was working well. Which mission are you on? One or two in the beginning have very squiggly triggers that require very specific stuff, if you know which part you're stuck on I can help.

Edited October 18, 2018 by 216th_Lucas_From_Hell

[Jade_Monkey]

Surprised it has not been posted yet.

I'm always tempted by these since they do a good job marketing wise, but the better side of me knows it's not worth the staggering amount of money to just play a couple of SP campaigns for WWII.

Also, the spit is the version with four 0.303 guns, no .50 cals ?

 

It does look interesting though:

 

 

[Archie]

I could imagine that running like a Slide Show, not a Big Show...

 

[Urra]

25 minutes ago, Archie said:

I could imagine that running like a Slide Show, not a Big Show...

 

Have the best hopes for the big show, but after years the bomber gunners still don't fire at all.  Why?

[Lusekofte]

My collecting of modules gotten way out of hands, I have big problems now figuring out what module I want to learn now. I figured I cannot learn them all so I figured I want to relearn the 

A 10C

Viggen

Or learn 

the Harrier 

or

the Hornet

I aint got the time for more than one

Edited October 28, 2018 by LuseKofte

[dburne]

Yeah I purchased Big Show yesterday I believe, not sure when I will get around to flying it but look forward to having a go with it.

 

[Lusekofte]

Well I finally decided I want to be good at the Harrier, I regret it already ? 

Or not, I am pretty stupid when it comes to jets, It took me forever to find the right control enabling to steer the front wheel on that thing. 

I have made some progress on controlled decent , but not very controlled . I find the training sequels to be less than adequate. Well I made a choice . I am going to be good at it

[Guest deleted@83466]

I can't justify buying any more DCS content until I've learned to fly the content I already have.  I've owned some "must-have" modules for years, and yet I am still a novice dabbler at all of them.  I keep telling myself I'm going to buckle down one of these days and really master at least one or two of them, but I'm not quite there yet. 

[dburne]

3 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

I can't justify buying any more DCS content until I've learned to fly the content I already have.  I've owned some "must-have" modules for years, and yet I am still a novice dabbler at all of them.  I keep telling myself I'm going to buckle down one of these days and really master at least one or two of them, but I'm not quite there yet. 

 

Have had DCS since the original Black Shark release (2008).

I own many modules, and to date I have learned 2 - at least enough to be able to fly and operate them somewhat.

 

I feel your pain, but these games are like a drug for me I guess lol. Plus of course IL-2 captivates more of my time.

[ZachariasX]

On 10/28/2018 at 4:54 PM, Jade_Monkey said:

Also, the spit is the version with four 0.303 guns, no .50 cals ?

That is the least of the problems. But there you have a 1943 Spitfire and 1945 Lufties... in 1944.

[Archie]

14 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

I can't justify buying any more DCS content until I've learned to fly the content I already have.  I've owned some "must-have" modules for years, and yet I am still a novice dabbler at all of them.  I keep telling myself I'm going to buckle down one of these days and really master at least one or two of them, but I'm not quite there yet. 

I could have written that lol! I still keep buying them though. Really looking forward to the F-14, another one I'll probably never find the time to learn.