DCS: F-15C Eagle web page available

[+streakeagle 864]

Great details on what is under the hood of the 1.2.8 beta F-15C AFM is here: http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/eagle/

I truly understand the work that has gone into this. I don't bother with DCS beta testing... that is for people with time to kill and don't mind being frustrated by major glitches. I can't wait until the major bugs are ironed out and I get to try the release version. I hope that a full DCS: F-15C is in the near future. In the absence of the MiG-21bis and no plans for an F-4, the F-15C is going to get some time from me if I like the flight model as much as I like the UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, Ka-50, P-51D, and A-10C.

 

I am thrilled by the possibility of flying an Su-27 with a reasonable flight model with an unscripted accurate Cobra maneuver! I hope Edge comes out soon, too. I want the performance gains and new maps. Red Flag with F-14s, F-15s, F-16s, and F/A-18s flying against each other sounds fun to me:  a beautiful and historically correct map combined with the aircraft that dominated a generation of combat aviation.

 

[JediMaster 451]

As a Combined Arms owner, Edge and Nevada are my hope to drive in a realistic world as opposed to feeling like I've been shrunk down on someone's train set.

[+streakeagle 864]

I bought Combined Arms, but I haven't even tried it. When I want to drive tanks, I play Steel Beasts Pro PE. If I ever get around to actually playing DCS World online, I like the idea of being able to man SAMs. I would love it if the DCS World SAMs had the option to be up to the same level of detail and realism as the free SAM simulator. As it stands now, I have more sims to play than I have time to play them. I have primarily been cycling between DCS P-51D, UH-1H, and F-15C with some F-4 and F-105 time in SF2, a bit of offline time in Aces High, and a touch of Steel Beasts. I almost haven't touched ArmA2 and OFP GOTY at all. 

[JediMaster 451]

I did some MP in Arma 3 in a tank with 2 other guys, a couple of APCs, and a lot of infantry on Mon night, great fun. Oh, and there was a guy doing CAS in a jet, I forget which one. If only the map was better suited to jets it would've been perfect.

 

Of course, I don't own SB. I can't justify that price for something I'd spend so little time on.

[+streakeagle 864]

I am primarily a fly-boy, so I don't spend too much time on SB, but it is worth the price... and I haven't even done the best part yet: multiplayer. I like it both for hard-core first-person tanking and as a modern substitute for tactical board games / miniatures rules I used to play in the 1980s/1990s where you are a company or battalion commander trying to stop the Soviet hordes coming through the Fulda gap. Just playing the gunnery practice missions is good fun and the better score you get the better your AI troops will perform (their training level reflects your training level). Instant action with a lone M1A1 trying to stop an advancing Soviet column is great for the feel of playing the old Battlezone arcade game, but with realistic physics and graphics. But playing a mission where you have pre-program a battle plan, then adjust that battle plan in real time to adapt to the current situation is fantastic... and you can still jump in tanks/apcs to take part in the shooting/driving. I will say that it takes time to get proficient with battle planning, managing all the platoons, and making the artillery calls. I am still not all that good at timing my artillery fire. I don't play enough to compete against humans, but I always play on the hardest settings, which apparently makes the AI way better than real troops would normally be. I love the challenge. If the M60A3 ever becomes a fully modeled manned vehicle, or better yet the M60A1 is added and modeled to that level, it will get a lot more of my time. As a commander, I love to try to win a scenario with M60A3s that is incredibly difficult to win using M1A1s. I can almost do it. If I could man the M60A3s and shoot during critical moments like I do with M1A1s, I think I might even finally get a victory. Every now and then, I spend a week or two on Steel Beasts. The high initial purchase price is a one-time fee, and the paid upgrades are few and far between and easily worth the typically $25 cost.

 

But OFP/ArmA is a lot more accessible for the not-so-hard core types and allows everyone to do what they like: snipe, run-n-gun, tank. fly helos, fly planes, etc. But the flight sims have gotten so good and my spare time has gotten so much smaller that I play Steel Beasts a lot more than the OFP/ArmA series. I really love the hard core sims and will gladly split my limited solo PC time between flying DCS P-51D, UH-1H, and FC3 F-15C, MiG-29, Su-27 with some SF2 F-4, F-105, MiG-21, and MiG-23 time thrown in for good measure. As the FC3 F-15C isn't modeled all that well yet and is easy to employ in combat, I mainly fly the old DACT missions I imported from LOMAC/FC2 which I modified to permit MiG-29 and Su-27 DACT missions, too. Whereas, the P-51D and UH-1H get a mix of cold start training and combat missions. I can spend hours just tooling around in the UH-1H to see where I can land without crashing.

 

I see ED realized the problem in calling it the DCS F-15C and have reverted to the FC label. They really should have created a new category since it is still FC level avionics but has a max detail DCS level flight model. I am quite sure the level of effort they have put into the flight model and associated systems modeling easily justifies charging FC customers for the upgrade. But since it is going to remain freebie delivered with FC3, it is fair to give it an FC label.