Flaming Cliffs 3

[Foxhound1 6]

Hey everyone,

 

I recently purchased DCS: Flaming Cliffs 3 during the summer Steam sale, but I haven't had time to actually play it yet. I was wondering, how does it compare to Strike Fighters 2 in terms of realism? I understand that Flaming Cliffs 3 is the "light" variant of DCS World, with aircraft featuring somewhat simplified systems.

 

Another question... the game comes with a map of the Caucasus, and I understand that you can purchase (expensively) new maps of Nevada and Normandy, but are there any free terrains made by fans that can be downloaded? Or can you only use the three official maps?

[Madfox01 1]

FC3 really is a glorified version of SF2.

 

Though, the avioncs work better than in SF2 as well as some other features.

 

Basically, I'd imagine that if/ when SF3 comes out, it would be fairly simular to FC3.

 

I haven't payed attention to the modding community so I can't comment on user- made terrians.

[+streakeagle 864]

I would always compare LOMAC/Flaming Cliffs/Flaming Cliffs 2 to SFP1/WoX/SF2. To compare apples to apples, fly the WoE/SF2E F-15A and A-10A on missions over Europe than fly the LOMAC/FC F-15C and A-10A on similar missions. Aside from obvious differences in the graphics, the main differences were in the AI behavior, flight modeling, and systems modeling. SF2 had somewhat better AI for air-to-air situations. SF2 had far superior flight modeling. The systems modeling was a toss-up. LOMAC/FC went into more detail on radar modes and allows you to move the cursor with a joystick, but SF2 modeled missiles much more accurately until their reliability/accuracy was nerfed in the last few updates to SF2NA. LOMAC/FC did have the advantage of truly functional multiplayer.

 

FC3 changes the comparison in several areas: the flight models for the flyable aircraft are now "professional grade" comparable to any other DCS aircraft. This makes flying the F-15 and A-10 superior to SF2. The missiles have been steadily upgraded to have more realistic flight and sensor performance at least as detailed and realistic as SF2. The AI has been somewhat improved as well. When you factor in the graphics improvements over the years, FC3 is pretty much superior to SF2 in every way but one: historical environments. SF2 covers every major map with period correct ground objects. FC3 can have Black Sea, Normandy 1944, Nevada, and very soon will have Straits of Hormuz. Of course all but the Black Sea are in an alpha/beta release state or unreleased, and Black Sea is in the middle of an upgrade to the future DCS World 2.5.

 

So, if you want to enjoy the F-15C, A-10A, Su-25, MiG-29, Su-27, and Su-33 over the Black Sea, Flaming Cliffs 3 is by far the way to go if you have hardware that can run it at a decent FPS. But the SF2 F-15A and A-10A as well as free user mods for so many other aircraft is a much more viable game for flexibility and variety. But if you can live with the terrain/environment limitations of DCS World, the complete plane set spans quite a wide time period and has something SF2 never delivered out of the box: matched opponents, perfect for multiplayer dogfights. P-51/Spitfire/Fw190/Bf109 for WW2, P-51/F-86/MiG-15 for Korea, MiG-21bis/F-5E/Viggen for 1970s, Mirage 2000/F-15C/MiG-29/Su-27 for 1980s/1990s.

[MigBuster 2,861]

Agree with the above....would also add that available aircraft for SF2 is still better than both.

 

Because of the effort it takes to do a single model in DCS you do get the quality but may not see many sub types of each aircraft e.g. the F-86A / E to go with the F..which of course most wont give a toss about.