LucShep

I also use a T-Flight Stick-X (so, the stick version, not the hotas version) and I find it to be no worse than the Logi Extreme 3D Pro. The stick "strength" adjustment on the base is a blessing (super nice to have), and the overall construction has proved to be very good, at least to me. Mine has over 2 years of constant use, no button issues, no calibration issues, just utter reliable. My only real beef with it is that the fire trigger feels "cheap" and minimal in comparison (to Logitech's), otherwise I think it's extremely good bang for the buck. I'm not sure if this will solve your issue, but I often use XPADDER in those situations. If you're not up to pay for a 3rd parties app, then get the latest freeware version of XPADDER from the following link: http://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/xpadder_(last_freeware_version).html How to use install and use it: Extract files to an empty folder of your choice - that'll be the XPADDER installation folder. :) You'll see the XPADDER executable. Make sure to change its properties ---- "run as administrator" rights and "Windows XP SP3" compability must be used for any Windows 7/8/10 based system PC. If you wish to do it all on your own, you have many good tutorials around, inclusively on youtube. For example: https://youtu.be/HEbLO1htCcs (note that this is for the later, payware version, but it's very identical) I already have the T-Flight Stick-X joystick configured in it for a basic setup, so perhaps you prefer to use it instead. :) Extract this ZIP into the XPADDER 5.3 installation folder: https://www.dropbox.com/s/okjfduis2ot0n64/Xpadder5-3free__T-Flight-X.zip?dl=0 If all works fine, then all you need is to adjust settings and key functions/combos for your own tastes, for any game.

I've noticed (too late) about this other branch of Falcon and I have some doubts regarding F4AF.... if it's worth it at this point or not. I do have Falcon BMS (4.32) installed for some time now, find it absolutely brilliant, but the learning curve is immense, extremely steep if you're not really a dedicated simmer with long time to spare. Too difficult and complicated. To make matters worse, I'm now in situation where I don't have a HOTAS, just a stick (T-Flight Stick-X, same as the old Fox 2 Pro) and, in my experience, it sure doesn't cut it for BMS (seems not enough for it). I'm reading forums with people mentioning that the F4AF campaign and missions are unmatched, that the learning curve is lower than with BMS, also that you can get away with just a stick. But I can't see any mentions if it still has a very long and complex learning curve, the kind of "million-page-manual-must-read" simulation, or if it makes things aproachable enough to present a good balance? Have looked at videos and screenshots, and F4AF does show its age, but I guess there are plenty mods to make it more digestible(?). To resume, my real doubts are regarding the gameplay and the learning curve. If it's good and balanced (specifically for single-player) without becoming daunting (like BMS is), and if it's confirmed that a stick will do just fine?

OK, I'll have a go anyway. :) Got a CD copy here doying nothing, might as well just have a go. Latest patch I believe is 1.013, right? As you guys seem experienced with it, any recommended "best mods" that are not payware? I've seen SkunkworksMOD_v1.2 being mentioned... is this some sort of compilation? I know Falcon was never about eye-candy, but would want it to get closer (somewhat) to more modern standards.

No, not looking for another SF2 in F4AF. What I'm looking for is something that sits in-between F4 BMS and SF2 in complexity, with dynamic missions and campaign. Thought F4AF could allow for that, and why I find myself looking at something so outdated. Flamming Cliffs 2 is more or less that, but then the whole thing feels lifeless, missions and (poor) campaigns are all scripted, game performance is very inconsistent (over cities, Shkval in SU-25T, Mavericks in A-10A) and etc.

Hmmm... not looking good in F4AF's favor, have to say. If the long manual reads and slooooow learning are still there, one would say that might as well just stick with BMS then? I do have FTrackNoIr with a PS3Eye cam and use it most of the time (a cheap alternative to TrackIR). So, I would want to be with 3D all the time. And payware mods? (wtf?) Guess I should stay with Strike Fighters 2 and Flamming Cliffs 2 for now. And waiting for Combat Air Patrol 2 to be released. Thanks guys for your responses. :-)

This one was posted yesterday and presents some interesting aspects (check it at 2:55): A quick look at some discussions/threads in Steam, some of the nasty lens effects are optionals that the user can switch off/on. Even better, there's a chance this game will see modding support at some point.

Hey guys, Just noticed that there's a new helicopter "light-sim", released on Steam as an "early acess" game title. Website: AIR MISSIONS: HIND It seems that this is something inspired on older 1990s games that were halfway between a simulator and an arcade game. It's obviously nothing like DCS:Blackshark, but might be interesting as an alternative to Apache Air Assault (which was actually not too bad, but just waaay too hectic), with more balanced pace. May be good for someone who also enjoys flying the chopper missions in Arma II and Arma III? Anyways, thought about mentioning it, and interested in hearing opinions from those of you that may have tried it already.

Many thanks, Do335. But considering past disapointing experience (though not necessarily with this mod), I'd rather avoid possible inconsistency of quality with cockpits, textures, overpowered guns, etc. Meaning, this time I prefer to be patient and wait for the final product.

Done a quick read through the thread, and agree that standalone mods are great. The 1950's Korean-war is an era and scenario that I'm very interested in, and I've never atempted to make a "custom built" SF2 installation dedicated for the period/scenario, because it looks absolutely daunting to do (impossible for me). We have great "care takers" of SF2 (and its modding), and it's definitely fantastic when you can trust such people as author(s) of this sort of compilation, as it somewhat ensures quality and reliable content for best end-user experience. Just wanted to say that your individual and collective efforts for this are very appreciated. Definitely "subscribing" and "liking" this thread.

I've been following development of Combat Air Patrol 2 for sometime, and am really looking forward for this title. I actually like a lot the AV-8B Harrier II, and the Strait of Hormuz scenario seems very interesting to me. Good post by Do335. No doubt, there's a lot to like in "super-accurate-harcore-sims" (say, the intricate DCS modules, or F4/BMS), but then there are aspects that are also important which those are lacking. The scalabilty is usually severely compromised. There is no middle ground, usually just two opposite extremes. You either have the full-on "simulation mode" which is really complex and with huge depth (for which both these titles are obviously designed for), or a really crappy simplified "arcade mode", which is simply uninteresting and making no sense for the concept. This is why, for example, titles like StrikeFighters 2 (note: with mods) make all the sense to me. It delivers a good level between "simulation" and "game". Meaning, it's fun and accessible, neither "ludicrous arcade" or "nerdy hardcore". Flaming Cliffs is also freakin excelent as middle-ground but, TBH, and for reasons that I can't really explain, it always felt "cold" to me (plus, no dynamic missions).Whatever FC iteration, it just doesn't grab me like SF2 did and does. While I still love DCS (I absolutely adore the A-10C!), I find myself spending as much time with SF2 (lately the Vietnam module). Strange as it seems, I would love something in-between SF2 and the DCS (and with dynamic missions + campaigns). The former just strikes me as a tad too simplistic at times, and the latter requires sometimes too much study and adaptation. If Combat Air Patrol 2 is the type of sim/game I've been looking for remains to be seen, but it's looking like a day one purchase to me. PS: I hope the developer(s) consider some sort of modding support for CAP2, as limited as it may be. With it, the chances of becoming a cult/classic title increase exponentially (IMO).

Sorry for necro-bumping the thread, but is there any news for this (freeware?) A-6 cockpit?

I would say if you can stretch to $100, you might as well go for a Saitek X-52 (non-pro version), which sells for little over that price. You'd have a very decent H.O.T.A.S. flight joystick, good not just for SF2 but for any other combat flight sim/game. To be honest I would be content with a used Saitek X-45 (very rare to find new now), which will certainly be found under that price. Otherwise, if it's about a good simple low-cost joystick, I would go for one of these: Thrustmaster T-16000 (only joystick under $150 with hall sensor - the stick itself is said to be the best in its price bracket and well beyond) Logitech Extreme 3d Pro (proven joystick, plenty buttons, high compability) Thrustmaster T-Flight Hotas X (it is a stick/HOTAS combo, which will probably add immersion) Saitek AV8R Aviator (has Dual Throttle, good for dual-engine aircraft in certain games)

Yep... I managed to bork it.... some planes are fully black, and there's pilots legs inside some of the cockpits (what the...??). I'll go through this even slower some other day (not again today, for sure). I do feel interested in having the ultimate SF-V, and I know modders in SF2 can deliver.

I have to say, I'm thrilled to find such a depth and care for SF2Vietnam, but man... following the recommendation with big packages above, the installation is not for the common user. It's extremely thorough and a bit complicated, requiring carefull read on what to do, and quite some time to go back and forth to fiddle with files (more so for the optionals on each). ... It's the first time I'm doing a separate SF2V installation (leaving my other modded SF2 merged install safe aside) and looking forward for a standalone, ultimate experience of SF2 Vietnam (to which, ashamedly, I never went in depth). And, honestly, I just wish all these tallented fellas joined forces (are they different groups?) and just do a simple, easy, single FULL installer. I'm going through this lenghty installation procedure right now and I'm completely insecure about the result - afraid that I may have borked things and have to restart all over again. Hopefully it'll be worthy of all the trouble (and then some).

Water cooling on a i5 4690 (which always runs at stock speeds and voltages) is overkill. Honestly, just get a CoolerMaster Hyper212Evo and be done with it (best cooler at lowest price, ever). With that Hyper212Evo, if you plan in having extra cooling in the case, like 2 intake fans (side, and bottom or front) and 2 extractor fans (rear and top), I think you won't need anything else for cooling, even in prolongued gaming sessions. Regarding PSUs, this is where you'll see different opinions across many forums.... let me extent a bit from the experience I've had (hopefully not too boring). Regardless of being modular or not, go for a reliable brand and look at the ratings. Get one that is (at least) "80 Plus Bronze" rated. The "80 Plus Silver" ones are a little better even, but also cost more. IMHO, you don't need to go for higher ratings than that, for which you pay a very heavy price ("80 Plus Gold" and "80 Plus Platinum"). Reason being, you don't usually need such high rated PSUs on real world scenarios (and gaming) with computers that never ever see overclocking or SLI/Crossfire (as is your case). But, and as rule of thumb (along with a reknowned brand) having overhead is important in a PSU. In your case, the minimum I would go for is 600 Watts, but not more than 750 Watts (again, because you're not going to SLI/Crossfire). I haven't used any semi-modular PSUs froom CoolerMaster, but it is a reknowned brand (reliable, good quality products). From what I read, those semi-modular PSUs from CoolerMaster are good, maybe a little overpriced. TechPowerUp has a review on the V750 model, check in here. I've dealt mostly with wired PSUs but lately there has been more interest in semi-modular ones. The ones I've messed with and seen in action for longer periods (recommended, check prices) are: CORSAIR CX M - Both the CX600M and CX750M are, by far, the most used ones here. Affordable and very decent quality - never seen one fail. SEASONIC M12II Bronze - Both the 650W and 750W are really good (as usual with every PSU from this brand) but probably not so readily available. XFX XTR Series Gold - These are higher rating (80 Plus Gold),so you do pay more. Only messed with the 650W model, found nothing to fault (it was even silent at full stress). At the end of the day, I believe, as long as it's a PSU from a reknowned quality brand, from 600W up to 750W, rated at least to "80 Plus Bronze" (and ready for Intel 4th Generation Haswell CPUs) that you'll be fine. :-)

I'm an AMD fan and user since the Athlon XP years (and I have a Phenom-II CPU based PC), but I can't recommend AMD CPUs right now, unless for really low-budgets. The rate of IPC (instructions per clock) in AMD processors of today (like Piledriver-Vishera FX processors) is extremely weak compared to Intel. And that is the most important thing with processors for gaming, especially with CPU intensive ones like simulators are. Untill AMD releases the "Summit Ridge" CPUs (expected in 3rd quarter of 2016), buying an AMD CPU for gaming is not the best investment right now. You pay more for Intel CPUs but, in this case and right now, you do get what you pay for. A small correction regarding the i5 4690: the 3.5 GHz is the base frequency. With the turbo-frequency, it effectively runs at 3.9 GHz. :-) In regard to the chipset, it's a bit hard to explain without going in-depth, but... the difference between Z97 and H97 mobos usually comes down to wider adjustments and features specifically for OC and hardware enthusiasts (like triple PCI-E lane, etc) in the case of the Z97. At stock-speeds and voltages both Z97 and H97 are equally "heavy-stress prepared" boards. Quality components (capacitors/mosfets, etc) are used in both chipset mobos. Which means that, if you don't want to overclock, (IMHO) you're wasting considerable money if going for a Z97, when it could be used in other components (SSD, RAM, or better GPU, etc). Around here the H97s sell as good or better than Z97s, exactly because the majority doesn't overclock and tend to go for non-K CPU (and save for better graphics in the process). I find odd that your prefered PC shop doesn't have H97 motherboards(?) but even so, can't they reserve one with the distributor for you? You mentioned preference to ASUS, both of these are very good, outstanding even considering their prices: http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_h97_pro_gamer_motherboard/1 http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=1347 For PC cases, it's the same deal. Money can be saved with good but inexpensive mid-towers, for which there have been great propositions like these: Antec Three Hundred Two Gaming Corsair Carbide 200R Zalman Z3 For the memories, go for two sticks of RAM v(2x 4GB, or 2x 8GB), because of dual-channel mode (better than single-channel with a single stick of ram). Round here (Portugal), we have good variety and selection of components like the rest of Europe. The difference is that our country's economy is still in the dump (very much so). Meaning, for PC enthusiasts and harcore gamers here, we're severely restricted by limited budgets (or heavy fees on extended credit). Being aware of what's around (what's good and not) became even bigger of a requirement, for ourselves and to assists friends, because with so much to choose, it's important to hand pick the right components when investing the hard earned money on a PC - as is your case now.

I don't know why I'm not able to edit my own post(???). To correct my previous post right above, where it reads "GTX760" its meant to be read "GTX960". Avoid the GTX760. While not a bad GPU, it is effectively slower than the GTX960, even if it does have higher bandwith. The GTX960 has newer architecture and has seen higher benefits with more recent drivers.

You've left important pieces of information that will make it easier to help you decide (and save money). Now, let's see in parts... :-) .The i5-4690K is worthy only if overclocking. For that, you would want a Z97 motherboard (same for Z87, but it's previous gen.). But, in your case, as you don't want to overclock, the extra expense on both "K" processor and Z97 mobo would be wasted. The best thing to do in your case is to get an i5 4690, an H97 motherboard, and good ddr3 1600 RAM (8GB or 16GB, depending on your budget). In regards to H97 motherboards, here's some that have been well regarded: - AsRock H97 Performance - Asus H97-Plus - Asus H97-PRO - Gigabyte H97-D3H - Gigabyte H97-Gaming 3 - MSI H97-Gaming3 All of these are good, some have things and features that others may miss (intel Lan on some, realtek Lan on others, more and less usb ports, etc). I would recommend looking at the specs of each, look for some reviews in the internet, etc, then choose accordingly. .Both the Nvidia GTX760 and the AMD R9-280X are both good GPUs to use for 1080P gaming. The Nvidia GTX760 (any model, OC or not) has the upper hand in wider compability due to Nvidia drivers being generally better (hence better performance in some games). It also consumes much less power, which also means that it'll run cooler when stressed. On the other hand, the AMD R9-280 is an excelent GPU, it has a bit more "umph", and also more VRAM (50% more), which is becoming important. The problems it could have for you is what was mentioned - AMD drivers are problematic with some games (although perhaps not with the games you plan), and it does use more power (gets hotter). With that said, I would strongly consider the GTX970 (any model, even a vanilla model from Nvidia will be good). With that beasty i5 4690 processor, believe me, it's a phenomenal combination that you'll appreciate in the longer term. :) .The i5 4690 processor is beyond any question or doubt. It'll even game at 4K if you throw a top GPU for it. Pair it with something like 16GB of memory and I'm convinced you got enough processor and RAM mem for the next 5 years of gaming. You'll be fine with either GTX960 or R9 280X for gaming at 1080P, no doubt. The real question is for "how long" (...and "what if other new or more intensive games suddenly appeal"...). My take on a PC investment is that sometimes budgeting and cutting corners doesn't pay up later - especially on the relevant things (I learned the hard-way... don't be like me! *sigh* lol). You don't want to spend the next years cutting settings down to keep framerates, nor hiting a wall in VRAM in a a festival of hi-res textures. Again, if you manage to afford the GTX970, do it. It's noticeably faster and has more VRAM than both those two, it'll keep you more satisfied for a longer time. If you ever need help chosing the RAM, the PC-case, fans, storage, PSU, bring up the questions.

Like with some of you, for me SF2 has phases where it becomes a bit "gone in vacation", sometimes for very long periods. But I keep coming back for it. It shares drive space with other combat flight sim/games in my computer. Some WW2 based, others based on modern era. Some are "hardcore/purist" inclined (Falcon BMS, IL2 CloD, even FC2), others not so much (Arma 3, Wings of Prey). But I keep coming back to SF2 everytime, and for various reasons, no matter how much I also enjoy the other titles (and other titles of various genres of games). Must be said, like with IL2-1946, the mods (and my own private modifications) are also half the appeal of SF2 for me. Besides IL2 1946, I don't think I've ever came across such a friendly game for this. I can follow the modding progress on various projects, download and try things that get to be a definite "must have" in my SF2 merged installation, etc. There's always something of interest, and I'm constantly amazed how the guys pull such awesome stuff. I can do "my own" customized (modded) installation and waste hours enjoying every progress with changes (or mess up!). And, while I feel that mods from this community really increase the quality of content from stock immensely, there's something else that stands out for me..... It's the aproach and gameplay of SF2. Some call it "SimLite". I just call it "perfect happy medium". I can decide to have some quick fun with SF2, feel immersed and satisfied, and never get the feeling I'm being fed with ridiculously hilarious crap, feeling treated like I'm stupid (hello Hawx!). SF2 has that right dose of realism, a balance between some of the details and properties for the hardcore simmer, and the good fun with uncomplicated aproach that a casual gamer looks for. It's neither, it's both. There's an equivalent to it in racing-sims, and that's GTR2 by SimBin. A great game on its own already in "vanilla" stage, but a thousand times better with add-ons -- still striving today after all these years. Honestly, I never understood why TW's Strike Fighters 2 wasn't a huge success (lack of online?). PS: ....wow, sorry for the wall of text!

Hello all, my very first post on the forums. (bare with the rookie!) I have SF2, SF2 Vietnam, SF2 Europe, SF2 Israel, expansion pack 1 and 2, and SF2 NA. I enjoy the game immensely, plus (of course) all the marvellous bits that modders produce out of passion (new planes, cockpits, tiles, sounds/voices, music, etc, etc). I hope the following doesn't sound dumb (especially to SF2 veteran users/modders) but, you see, even if I get that there's always new stuff coming out all the time, frankly, it's extremely overwhelming for a guy like me that can only go so far, watching individual files upon many dozens of others, for different aspects of the game. Lately I've been getting the urge for WW2 planes. I've enjoyed IL2 many years ago (I know there's mods for it), also some experience with Wings Of Prey (good, but lacks substance) but I'm honestly satistified with what SF2 delivers "all around" as platform. I found out about this particular section of the forums, and got me thinking that, maybe, I'm not alone in thinking about getting SF2 working dedicated solely to WW2 airplanes. So, if a "WW2 based SF2" is possible, or if it has been achieved, is there any "compreensive guide" to get the game working like that? (new separate installation, or...?) What files to get (and delete?) and what exactly is needed? Is there any comfortable "collective package" (all-in-one kind of thing) installer? Many thanks in advance!

Thanks, Wrench. I'll be looking into the knowledge base. Don't worry, I'm not new to modding and the pain of fiddling with files. My "vintage" affection to machines and modding for games comes from a project I'm involved with for some years now. (shameless plug... see here) My only problems are 1) learning a whole new game-engine structure and editing (and big library of community files!) that I know nothing about, and 2) lack of free time and clean head to attack it. I'll manage it. hehe PS: I still think that preparing a full working package (w/ instructions) basically made of the latest and best bits for a FS2 WW2 based content, would go a long way for newcomers.

Thanks so much for the warm welcome and (quick) reply, Wrench! ......playing WW2 in 'stand alone' type installs of SF2 since at least 2005? ......please, do tell more! I suppose that others already have explored the same terrain I'm about to cross into then. That particular sticky thread already answers part of my questions (nice and usefull, thank you!), but still leaves me with plenty. You mention the term "total conversion" in that thread, and basically that is what I'm looking for. I think I would wish a Europe scenario (thinking Battle of Britain 1940, as loose example for that), but my confusion comes about substituing all the "more modern" assets, I mean, possibly not just the fighters, but also the bombers, wipe any presence of missiles (etc, etc), for a full "propeller-WW2-aircraft" game environment (new missions/campaign for it required?).... it starts to sound like a monumental effort of individual files searching, downloading, fiddling and messing (or is it?).