DCS where we go?

[+paulopanz 2,876]

Well, my friends, Tk (aka TW) left us. Now he plays with silly game phones .... but I'm very happy for his new job.

 

So DCS could be a good place to continue our hobby.

 

But, as far I know,  the only terrain available is Georgia (Wingsoverisrael can be very happy ..) and planes seem to me - I could be wrong - quite always those from lock on or flaming cliffs .....

 

They made a fantastic P-51D and are making a superb F-86F  ..... but what we can do with them?

 

This is a modern simulation with a WWII and a Korea age plane to fly .... a nonsense for me.

 

If they want to grow - I think - a more popular terrain should me made (Vietnam, Middle east, Europe, Korea ....) and many more plane of the same age too.

 

About WWII I think there isn't no future: IL-2 serie and next IL-2 Stalingrad will prevale. So a fantastic Fw-190D-9 Dora could not be the right thing to develop this sim.

 

For a jet age sim Tk seems left the scene and could be room .... but this is not the way to go on.

 

No joy, in fact,  to fight a P-51 or an F-86 with an F-15 over Georgia.

 

I have DCS/FC3 but I'll not buy such add-ons.

 

This is only my humle opinion and excuse me for my bad (italian) english.

 

So I will go back to my SF2 brushes, waiting for realy DCS good news.

 

Have a good summer!

 

Paul

Edited July 28, 2014 by paulopanz

[+JonathanRL 974]

For me, DCS is not an option since it does not provide a clear package. Sure, a lot of neat aircraft to fly and all that, but you can only fly them in one place - and depending on the Aircraft you fly, against a single opponent.
DCS has potential but I think it needs to be more modding friendly. I hope they will consider that in whatever comes after DCS World.

[+streakeagle 871]

When SFP1 originally came out, it had a smattering of nifty 60s jets over a fictional middle eastern country. That didn't stop me from enjoying it. I could set up Vietnam era dogfights to my heart's content with the only problems being the color of the terrain below and the total lack of clouds. User mods and later releases were just icing on the cake, as I already had a game where I could fly F-4s and F-104s against MiG-17/19/21s right out of the box.

 

LOMAC's flight modeling never appealed to me, I found SFP1's flight engine far more satisfying. So, despite buying all of the LO/FC/FC2 packages, I never played them more than once in a while. As someone who prefers air combat and the 50's/60's/70's eras, I had little interest in flying the Ka-50 or the A-10C, so I had never even bothered to purchase those DCS titles.

 

Jump ahead to now: DCS has some classic matches: P-51D vs Fw190D9 (with many more on the way), the F-86F vs the MiG-15bis, and the F-15C vs the MiG-21bis/MiG-23MLD/MiG-29S/Su-27. Just around the corner (another year or two?) there will be a lot more flyables. Presumably, the eminent release of Edge and associated developer tools will lead to some appropriate maps (Nevada and some sort of WW2 Normandy map should be out this year?). I am having a blast flying ACM, the fact that it is over Georgia doesn't bother me a bit. But give me Korea, Vietnam, and a few more aircraft from those wars (especially the F-4 and earlier MiG variants), and the SF series just might go unused.

[+Dave 2,322]

As much as more terrains are needed some of you harp on that too much. 

 

 

They made a fantastic P-51D and are making a superb F-86F  ..... but what we can do with them?

 

Fight the P-51D against the FW-190, F-86F against the Mig-15. When you are actually dogfighting are you really thinking about the terrain at that moment. You are not. 

 

 

This is a modern simulation with a WWII and a Korea age plane to fly .... a nonsense for me.

 

That is the most hypocritical statement I have seen yet, um SF2, want me to make a list of planes from eras we all have done? So sorry that doesn't fly. 

 

 

 

DCS has potential but I think it needs to be more modding friendly. I hope they will consider that in whatever comes after DCS World.

 

We will never have it as good as we did with SF 1/2. I do wish the same though. 

 

 

For me, DCS is not an option since it does not provide a clear package.

 

Well actually it does, they are doing a WWII sim for example. Different teams are working on different aircraft and are releasing them as they are done. Just like we did in SF2. The problem is that people do not want to change, and are too stuck on a 12 year old sim. They do not want to learn something new. Well SF1/2 had a good run and the latest from TK just proves that its done. If Eagle Dynamics has a fault it is the marketing. They are confusing as hell. But that is minor. Right now for example that F-86F is fantastic. I'm having fun with it like when Zur released his 10 years ago SF1. If you don't want to fly DCS that's great, but some of the excuses are weak. 

[Happy308 186]

DCS is very nice but it does not run well on my pc, very low Fps when looking in a certain direction.

Sometimes even as low as 8 fps.

I tried every tip on the dcs forum but with no success. After a couple of day's of changing every possible setting and drivers etc. I gave up.

Now I only play SF2 (and still like it very much) and sometimes Falcon alied force an MS flightsimulator.

There are so many great mods for SF2 that I wont get bored with it very soon.( buccaneer, mirage F1, new germany terain, weapons pack etc)

At this moment I am flying a 1960's europe campain as a royal Netherlands f-84f thunderstreak pilot.

 

My PC specs:

Intel i5. 8gb ram ssd hard drive radeon7970 2 gb graphics card.

[+Dave 2,322]

Happy308 get 8 GB more ram and you will see a huge difference. 

[+CrazyhorseB34 937]

The development of DCS seems to be controlled by 14 year olds with ADHD.

 

ALL OVER the place.........

[SFP1Ace 33]

Happy308 get 8 GB more ram and you will see a huge difference. 

 

it's more like "Overclock your CPU to 10Ghz and you will see a huge difference". DCS is mainly CPU bottlenecked, heck it's not even properly multi-threaded (only audio has got a separate thread, all the rest is calculated on 1 CPU...)

Hopefully DX11 Edge will improve on it...

[+Dave 2,322]

The development of DCS seems to be controlled by 14 year olds with ADHD.

 

ALL OVER the place.........

 

 

 

[+russouk2004 6,958]

I run it on highest settings DCS world and fc3 with i5 4670k o\c to 4.2 ghz,8gb of ram (teamgroup vulcan 2000mhz dual ch) Z97-HD3 Intel Z97 gaming mobo,samsung 840 pro ssd xfx 7950 3gb ddr5 gfx card running @stock and great fps

never looked at making a\c for dcs is the model setup very different?

Edited July 28, 2014 by russouk2004

[FastCargo 412]

Well, some modders here initially said that converting a model to work in DCS from TW wouldn't be that difficult (assuming you had the MAX file of course). However, as far as I know there has not been ONE model that this has happened with.

 

From what I understand, the amount of effort to program in LUA (the language used for things like avionics) was seriously underestimated.

 

Also, I have to chuckle a bit. One of the reasons folks would bitch about the TW sims was the constant patching. That doesn't seem like it's going to happen anymore. Any mods you create for SF2 will probably work forever. Yet no one seems to bring that up as a positive...

 

DCS seems to run pretty well for me, but I have a fairly modern gaming laptop.

 

FC

[SFP1Ace 33]

I run it on highest settings DCS world and fc3 with i5 4670k o\c to 4.2 ghz,8gb of ram (teamgroup vulcan 2000mhz dual ch) Z97-HD3 Intel Z97 gaming mobo,samsung 840 pro ssd xfx 7950 3gb ddr5 gfx card running @stock and great fps

never looked at making a\c for dcs is the model setup very different?

The last time I've tried DCS World/FC3 (a couple of patches ago) with i5 4670k @ 4.5Ghz, 8GB RAM, Z87 mobo, Plextor M5S SSD and 7870XT 2GB GFX  AND FRAPS, the FPS were allright in the air, but could have been better on the ground/airport with lots of objects, parked aircraft etc took it's toll...with the graphic settings sliders maxed or nearly maxed as I recall, of course.

[Happy308 186]

Hi Guys,

 

Thanks for the tips.

But the wierd thing is, When on the runway surrounded bij ground objects the FPS is fine, it's between 38  / 45 fps.

When flying the fps goes up to  50 / 60 fps.

 

But when I look in the direction of a dogfight the fps drops to below 10 fps. But there is absolutely nothing to see in that direction. Because the action is too far away.

As soon as I look back to my 12 o clock the fps are back to normal again.

 

Putting all sliders to low, and using a very low resolution does not help.

 

As far as I know my CPU is not suitable for overclocking (Intel Core I5 2400 3.10)

Edited July 29, 2014 by Happy308

[Stratos 3,191]

I read once that adding a DCS 3d model is not that hard. Is all the associated LUA scripting for FM and systems work that is hard and time consuming. In fact in this post you can see several new models integrated in DCS BUt without proper cockpits. No idea about the FM.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=118794

 

Maybe If several SF2 modders band together for ONE DCS project we can see something great, but that will require team work and full dedication I think.

[+Dave 2,322]

[JediMaster 451]

DCS has historically had problems with combat effects. Firing unguided rocket barrages, streams of bullets, cluster bombs, all seem to kill FPS all out of proportion to what is actually being shown on screen (which is as mentioned here often far away or out of the FOV).

 

I'm hoping (but have heard nothing one way or another) that EDGE/DX11/1.3.0/2.0 will solve or at least greatly ameliorate this condition, because at 1.2.9 I know it still happens and have given up thinking it will ever be fixed in the current form of the engine.

[+streakeagle 871]

What happens when edge is released and it looks a bit better, but performance is the same or worse? I am thinking of SF2, which greatly improved performance over SFP1, but then took a step backwards in an attempt to compete with modern graphic engines in SF2:NA. Iceland looks great in terms of height resolution... but I want full size maps like Vietnam and frame rates at Vsync 60 Hz on a respectable system. I also wasn't particularly impressed with the water in SF2:NA. LOMAC/FC series is almost as old as SFP1 and did a much better job with water.

[MigBuster 2,884]

What happens when edge is released and it looks a bit better, but performance is the same or worse? 

 

Lots of people will moan about it............

[Boresight 51]

DCS ?

 

And what about " DCS: MiG-21 bis " ? Sounds promising.

 

Anyone heard of it ? Is that project going to be released or what ?

Edited July 31, 2014 by Boresight

[Boresight 51]

EDIT

 

This is what I'm talking about:

 

http://combatace.com/topic/82176-leatherneck-mig-21bis/

[MigBuster 2,884]

Its been in development for so long - the release date is whenever it comes out basically

[Boresight 51]

Its been in development for so long - the release date is whenever it comes out basically

 

I see... wait, I thought that one was " Jet Thunder " !  

[Centurion-1 1,228]

I just upgraded my main rig, now I got a nice i5 4670K, Z87 mobo and GTX760, finally can play DCS:W for the first time (even tho I have owned A-10C, Black Shark 2 and FC3 for a long time), and I am enjoying myself. But the real revolution will be when the new map tools will be released, hopefully to the general public. And from what I understand it, EDGE should alleviate FPS problems and allow for even nicer scenery. 

 

But like most people here, I hope for more cold war stuff. Still, it aint looking bad, I mean soon we have Su-25A, MiG-29A/S and MiG-21bis flyables so there is at least a good amount of Soviet VVS aviation of the 80s represented!

 

And yes, if there was a good, concerted effort by the modders here to have a go at creating a DCS module I would be game, but the dev time does seem to be unreal... And we would still need experienced LUA scripters and probably a C++ coder too.

 

If I was ED I would really look at releasing all the source files for some older aircraft like the MiG-29A so you could just fill in the blanks to create new flyables... I am not very familiar with what is out there though.

 

 

PS. While I understand it from a financial aspect, I hate that they had to start going down the WW2 route. Seriously, there are so many quality simulations done of that period, can we please stop already? Just my opinion, so agree to disagree...

[JediMaster 451]

Personally I think the 21bis won't be out until 2.0/EDGE comes out. It's been pushed back so much that now that EDGE is so close I don't think they want to bother with a pre-EDGE release.

[paulrkiii 16]

Personally I think the 21bis won't be out until 2.0/EDGE comes out. It's been pushed back so much that now that EDGE is so close I don't think they want to bother with a pre-EDGE release.

 

My gut tells me EDGE isn't close.  IMO If EDGE was close I would think they would have released the Dora, F-86 with the update to EDGE (not to mention the Hawk being mentioned for release in 1.2.9.).  If EDGE was close why have a 1.2.9 or 1.2.10?  Yes they are both simply for release of the Dora/F-86 and supposide Hawk and Mig-21 but who knows. 

 

I hope I'm wrong, I'm ready to fly around the current map in EDGE.  I flew 1.3.0. for a couple months before I left the tester team and the early versions looked good.  Won't comment on performance.   And the sooner 2.0.0. is released I hope Nevada won't be far behind.  My gut says 2.0.0. November/December 2014 with Nevada coming mid to late spring 2015.