Leaderboard

I dont agree ... I'm not a charity case that need free stuff to be thrown at me ... we all know how long any DCS Module takes to make, just look at some of the free aircraft Mods and how long they have to be in development before release, that time represents development money, and in that light US$ 10 for increasing your FC-3 level aircraft from 7 to 10 seems like a truly reasonable price.

Well, in that case, please help. Boresighting was broken in the last patch. What should I do?

Ich würde mir mehr Bilder oder ein Video von dieser Map wünschen. So ein richtiges Bild bzw. einen Eindruck konnte ich mir bisher nicht machen von der Karte, dafür geben die Veröffentlichungen einfach zu wenig her. So kurz vor den Release empfinde ich alles noch als ziemlich vage. Und der Teaser war diesbezüglich auch völlig unnötig. Nur weil OrbX schon seit 15 Jahren Karten und Szenarien für Flugsims erstellt, bedeutet das noch lange nicht automatisch, dass ihnen das auch in DCS sofort befriedigend gelingt. Besonders hinsichtlich der Performance kann man da auch mal schnell "ins Klo greifen", wie man an anderen Karten sehen kann. Aber nicht nur der schonende Umgang mit den Ressourcen des PC ist ein wichtiger Aspekt, sondern für mich auch die Optik. Als neue "grüne Karte" sollte die Kola-Map unsere alte Kaukasus-Map in dieser Disziplin sehr deutlich übertreffen. Wenn ich ehrlich bin, erhoffe ich mir von so einem erfahrenen Hersteller auch, dass die Kola-Map die SA-Map (welche in Teilen doch ähnlich sein sollte) übertrifft. Die Latte liegt also recht hoch...

@X-Ray any update on this livery pack?

Please do not drink before posting on the forum thanks.

Well there's certainly a lot of opera over this phantom!

The irony of all this is that at anytime, should ED close up shop for whatever reason, none of our installs will work anymore without the license verification server. I’d be more concerned about that.

Oh duck, here we go again....... Everytime the same drama.

3D model update : Its comning along nicely - Coffee 2D artist Caffine simulations

Seeing as how it's been a problem for the life of the f-16! But, mysteriously when CUSTOMERS that are fed up with them still not working post about it, the thread gets closed or the post gets deleted all together. Seems like it would be a fantastic idea if the frivolous aesthetics weren't given priority over primary & initially developed systems that were slated to be operating a LONG time ago. Now, the race is on to lock the thread or delete the post!

They haven't exceeded mine

You probably have paid hundreds of thousands in local stores. Go ask if they owe you something for free now.

The gatling/rotary gun based CIWS can be pretty effective, at single targets. They fire an enormous amount of projectiles in a very short amount of time. A subsonic antiship missile will have to rely on simultaneous attacks, evasive maneuvers and low visibility to avoid being defeated. As I said before, it's a shame we can't implement more types of evasive maneuvers, like snaking. In your example, I assume the NSMs arrived one at a time since the CIWS wouldn't be able to engage multiple targets at once.

That still isn't a reason to hold content back so some YouTubers can drum up interest. Honestly though, Heatblurs cinematic trailers are a league above any YouTuber content. I was on a DCS break around the time the F14 came out. It wasn't a YouTuber content creator that brought me back, it was the F14 video produced by HB. The biggest DCS YouTube channel is sadly GR and they do almost zero promotional content and it they do it's stuck between 2000 videos of hypothetical comedy situations using dodgy mods.

I'm much the same over the shenanigans,I won't be requesting a refund......but I sure ain't ever going to pre order again,rofl.

I agree, it seems they have the B team working on the F16, can’t seem to work on one feature of the aircraft without messing something else up lately, even simple easy to spot stuff like missing textures on the standby attitude indicator, last patch it was incorrectly animated engine exhaust nozzle. Now also we’re seeing people reporting that the radar is able to lock up aircraft even while it’s turned off, all these problems makes learning this module feel like a complete waste of time because how do I know what I just learned is correct and isn’t going to change next patch. It’s incredibly frustrating.

Most, actually. Though has more to do with games from that era possessing gamespy as the only real internet dependency and that can be circumvented by a private master server or a VPN like GameRanger or Tunngle. I can still install Homeworld, Cataclysm, Unreal, the Thief series, you name it. I even have Flanker 2.5 installed and it runs fine, though it's always a wise idea to go find a new sourceport or fix just to get widescreen support as that's the only consistent issue. Honestly, if there are classic games you'd like to revisit? Hit up GoG and then the game's forums to find any potential recommended fixes. It's worth it! Anyways, back onto topic: The real thing that hamstrings a game and limits its longevity is the dependency on online services. A subscription service furthers that dependency and can drives away these particular players. A model like World of <Insert crap here> or War Thunder is probably the worst: Can't host private servers, dependent on tons of microtransactions, etc. Both approaches would alienate a big enough chunk of the consumer base to actually be an existential threat to DCS World, and the communications we get from ED on this topic indicate that pretty clearly. Publishers hate PC players paying an upfront, single time fee. They like that little drip feed since they can get so much more out of you over time. I've read a number of opinion pieces and have had shareholder documents shown to me that they easily get 4 times a standard game MSRP if the game is free to play and supported via microtransactions. It's absolutely predatory. It encourages developmental laziness while ensuring a large portion of a player base will provide what is, in essence, a new game purchase spent regularly while not having a new game made at the same time. Another reason they detest us is because when we find a game we like? We're going to play it. For years. The best example? Falcon 4.0. How many still play that and even still play Allied Force? It doesn't have a closed ecosystem of servers providing you matchmaking, it can't lock off major sections of content behind arbitrary experience grinds, it doesn't require a monthly fee for access, so it was completely cut off from the publisher once it launched. They can't shut it down, they can't tell us "IT'S BEEN FUN GUYEZZ" in some fake sentimentality post on social media. They have no control over it. They want that so they can force you away from an older product and to buy newer product, frequently seen as inferior. That's why they really love the F2P model, it forces the player to be completely subject to that publisher/developer's particular digital fiefdom. They can retire and stop service whenever they want. Sure, there are ubernerds who can flex their skills and make them run on private servers, but the game's still dead and you'll never see it at full potential ever gain. Time to move onto the next slot machine, I guess? The only 2 games with ethical free-to-play scheme that I have played are DCS World, which charges what they want in total upfront while also providing ample price reductions during sales and the ability to try out a product, free, for a limited time and the other is Warframe, who doesn't have a long grind for the most part, has solid action, and a very simple monetization scheme that doesn't bar access to anything save for a few cosmetics and, in practice, only really affects inventory space.

Heatblur Simulation's serious delay for the dcs f-4e has exceeded the range that "normal" people can tolerate, so it has no choice but to announce that it agrees to accept applications for refunds! It has been half a year since the pre-order started last year!! Regardless of the reason, it is the company's management bad consequences

ED offers miles as a reward to buyers. And your past payments to ED were for the modules you received. Why should ED owe more than that?

IMHO The price isn't bad, however I already own the FF versions of F-5E/F-86 and moreover I'm not interested in buying any more FC level module.

I also totally agree. I think the Jeff is one of the best modules in DCS as well as being refreshingly modern and just different. In addition Deka have modelled things which noone else has really modelled. The interaction with the ground crew, DTC, defog and the pilot getting cold. If you haven't already check out my playlist here for the FJ-17

ahaha i knew it !!

Perhaps I'm unaware of some kind of history about the OP, or maybe I'm just naïve, but I'm a bit surprised on the amount or toxicity in this thread (especially as I've never seen this kind of behaviour from some of the people that responded to this thread). Admittedly, the whole "I got fat" part was weird and unnecessary, but it seems the guy is pretty green/new here, yet presumably posted his/her idea with good intentions (even though, like everyone here, I don't agree at all with this idea). I expect he has never seen any of the other discussions about this topic, or else I assume he wouldn't have gone through the trouble of posting this essay. So, even though pretty much nobody wants a monthly subscription model for DCS, why is there so much hostility in all these reactions? Have I missed some sort of trolling history with this guy or something?

Ja, ich glaube, die 650 Watt sind das Maximum das sie theoretisch über den PCI Slot und das zusätzliche Kabel ziehen kann. Ich habe in einem Bericht mal gelesen, dass in der Praxis aber selbst die hungrigsten RTX4090 bei max. 400-450 Watt liegen. Da kann man dann nochmal 100 Watt für die CPU draufpacken, 100 Watt für den Rest des Systems und hat dann auch mit einem 850 Watt Netzteil noch genug Reserven für irgendwelche Spitzen (das Straightpower 11 kann auch kurzzeitig über 900 Watt liefern). Wie gesagt, aktuell gibt es keinen wirklichen Grund ein 850 Watt beQuiet auszutauschen. Das sind qualitativ gute, Multirail Netzteile. Das Bild in VR ist trotzdem größer, bietet Headtrackung und 3D Darstellung ...

Arrow-3 kill vehicle is attempting to direct shoot incoming MRBM warhead in space

OH-58D window release is end of May, early June 2024 (Polychop Discord).

So since the OP asked for MiG killers, and I didn't see many of these in here or in the list on discord I thought Id take a look myself. Hopefully these aren't all reposts.... I focused mostly on F-4Es that survived the war and were upgraded with Leading edge slats etc in 74, aka something similar to what our F-4 will be. A bit late to the party but maybe its still helpful... Anyway in no particular order: 69-7235 Killed a MiG-21 on a chaff bombing mission during Linebacker I. Upgraded with LES in 74. Later converted to F-4G and even later to QF-4G and blown up by an AMRAAM. 68-0493 Killed a MiG-21. LES upgrade in 74. Later sold to ROKAF. 67-0392 killed 2 MiG-19s in separate incidents. Recieved LES in 75. Later served in AFRES, now hangs in a museum in virginia. 69-0291 Killed a MiG-21. Got slats in May 74, currently on display in Osan. 67-0333 killed a MiG-21. LES in 75, and after sitting in AMARC went to a museum in Norway. 67-0210 got a gun kill on a MiG-19 on 2 June 72. LES upgrade in 74. Later sold to Turkey where it was in service till 2004. 68-0338 got 2 MiG-21s in separate shootdowns. Got LES at some point in service with 33rd TFS. Ended up with Missouri ANG and is currently on display at the St Louis International airport. 67-0232 killed a MiG-21 with the gun in Oct 72. The 2nd last F-4E kill during the Vietnam war. LES mods in 74. Stored at AMARC before being sold to Turkey in 87. 67-0301 got the last kill by an F-4E in Vietnam, shortly after 67-0232 above. Recieved slats in 1975. Given to Turkey in 1992 after desert storm. In a stunning display of brilliance they flew it into the water while violating Greek airspace in 1995. 66-313 and 67-0362 were both transferred to Israel in 73 as part of Operation Nickel Grass. 67-0362 was Steve Ritchie's aircraft for a double MiG-21 kill on 8 July 72. 68-0337 didn't kill any MiGs... but its a nice livery made to commemorate the victories during Vietnam.

LOL!!!!!!!!!! It actually is 100% stolen from Flight of the Intruder. I am 43 and grew up with the icons such as the Phantom, Intruder, Tomcat, Corsair, and Crusader. So when Heatblur announced the Intruder as a module, I was in shock. Absolutely cannot wait for that one! Might I suggest a phenomenal mod if ever interested since it has not remotely been mentioned by third part devs, the F-105 Thunderchief. Another Iconic figure in aviation that deserves her name in the DCS Hall of Fame. Keep up the awesome work on the mods for the community! I was just flying the OV-10 Last night.

New video, front turret:

If I understood Heatblur correctly, they were clearly of a different opinion. They didn't feel comfortable with a bug, that would break the Phantom for 5-10% of the customers... and I agree here. Some 10 YouTubers getting a marketing release for free and one of them not able to start the thing, is negligible, but going into recess and fixing the root cause from scratch, with the prospect one out of ten paying customers getting hit, is a very sound judgement call. Thanks to Heatblur for taking the time to fix this and be willing to take the brunt of the inevitable sh.t storm.

The moment subscription comes, im off.

Hi, nice to see that FC3 gets three more planes, good especially for beginners. But,..why there is nothing for the Warbird Community? We are lacking Full Fidelity Models (e.g. japanese Planes for WWII Marianas) and we have no Low fidelity models....and only one real map to use. Kola Map could be have Finish-Russian-Winter-War-Scenario,....but I-16 against 109? But even we have no early 109C or Hurricane for this. There could be really something. P.

Agreed. You can be firm with your opinions without being rude. One thing I've noticed with many people that are pro-subscription is that they almost seem to assume that older modules make next to no money and therefore become a net loss due to maintenance, which forces them to make new rushed products. Is that really true? The Hornet for example is 6 years old now and is still the most popular module. It's a gift that keeps on giving for ED. And as much as there is to complain about the sim, I've seen ED be pretty good with updating and maintaining their products. I don't really see the "rushed module releases that are abandoned" trend. They all seem to get a lot of work. The super-carrier is a bit of an exception, though I do wonder if part of the issue with the super-carrier was them having to wait on other core upgrades to be done, and also the general difficulty with implementing certain novel features, rather than it being part of an overall trend of module development. As for us losing all our modules if ED closes shop, I wonder if they would just remove the authentication system completely if that happens.

For future reference, it'd be good to show the movement of the red dot in the control axis screen as well, it should be able to move from full left to right (or vice versa) with the full travel of the brake movement. I suspect you've tried to calibrate the pedals with 0% at one end and 100% at the other. They should be calibrated (like all axes) as -100% to +100%, so your axes only goes halfway (to zero), then stops. I'm not sure how the TARGET software screws with the control calibration. For a sanity check, check the USB Game Controllers applet to compare

My incremental download for the US pack is around 5% of the complete pack. I've used GitHub a lot for development, so I'm familiar with its pros and cons. The main issues in this use case is the fact that my DCS asset packs contains 99% textures and model data. I would run into size issues requiring Git LFS, storage space issues and of course usability issues. I get a lot of questions about installing the asset packs as of now, imagine if all users had to sync a repository.

IMO the ideal solution would be to add a combo box in the ME to either allow both variants (e.g. F-86FC and F-86), or make the slot exclusive to one variant or the other (for servers that want to restrict it to high fidelity). This would give mission builders the flexibility without having to create extra slots for each version. Hopefully ED implements something like this, esp. with the high fidelity MiG-29A coming out as well.

We are complaining about the current state of the F16, it’s not that hard to understand the frustration people are feeling. Who made you forum police anyway?

Excuse the shameless self-promo but I got some liveries that just got approved. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3337016/ https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3337014/

Geez, I'll buy you that upgrade when it's out, ok?

Troll

The original F-4F, was an F-4E with significantly fewer capabilities... Only the F-4F ICE would be interesting in my opinion. But that's already post Cold War and would be rather uninteresting for me. I hardly think it would be worth the effort (but I may be wrong).

I was 12 *cough* miles away from Petropavlovsk in the mid 80s. Went from Pearl to Kamchatka in about two weeks, and hit 48' seas on the way. July 4th the windchill was about -20C, broke the -40, broke 2 plant, had a P-3 from Adak bring out spare parts, then spent the next thirty minutes or so in a race with the Soviets to find the parts they dropped for us because they sucked at it. Lots of good stories from that cruise, some I probably shouldn't mention... Fun summer. Wish we could have pulled into port for a visit, though; the landscape was pretty awesome!

an inappropriate solution to a problem that exists in the OP mind....

You can use the keys: Left Control + w Another way is, if the mission is of your making, add this trigger to have the hatches open at start: I'm attaching an example mission Caucasus Ka-50 cold start.miz

Точность, точность вы порезали недавно!

There are a few things that I think get lost in the comparison of FC3 modules to other so-called "full fidelity" modules. First, all FC3 modules other than the Su-25 use the professional flight model. (See https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/general/). This is really important. The most important thing about a module in my view is its flight model. The thing that attracted me to Flanker 1.0 many years ago is that it was the first sim I experienced where there was a sense of flying rather than steering on rails, and this continues to this day. The main challenge for any module with a good flight model is learning to fly it well, not learning systems. There is a lot of content online of people flying the Flanker and Flogger well that make this point. That FC3 modules use professional flight modeling means that their development costs are significant. It's not like ED can come up with dozens of these at little cost. Personally, I'd be pretty upset if ED started releasing flyable modules with dumbed down physics. Fortunately, they have shown no inclination to do that. Second, clickable cockpit is not the same thing as "full fidelity." Real fighter pilots do not click things with a mouse or use a computer keyboard. They use their fingers and Hotas controls. Because using a mouse and keyboard while flying is awkward and unrealistic, I spend a good bit of time trying to map my clickable controls onto Hotas buttons. That is, given that I can't push console buttons or switches or knobs with my hands, I find it more realistic, and certainly easier, to map these to Hotas rather than using a mouse and keyboard. Of course for a complex module such as the hornet where there are dozens of buttons (think MFDs) that you might need to use in-flight you can only go so far with this approach. But the aspect of flying the Hornet that I find least realistic is having to grab the mouse when I need to push a button or throw a switch. To be clear, I enjoy the study aspect of learning a complex module like the Hornet. I like the more advanced radar and other systems compared to the FC3 Flanker. I'm not trying to suggest that this doesn't matter. But people who indicate that they have no interest in the FC3 planes because they are not clickable are missing that they still have excellent flight models and are enjoyable to fly and fight with. Furthermore, the controls interactions aren't that different once you map everything to hotas buttons. Personally, I'm curious to learn what is going to be simplified in the new FC4 aircraft relative to their clickable versions given that these are pretty simple modules already. For example, since almost everything of importance in the clickable MiG-15 can be mapped to hotas already, it isn't clear to me that the FC4 version will be very different in practice from the existing module. For example, when I fly the MiG-15 the only switches I click with a mouse are the ones needed for startup. The ones needed in flight are mapped to my stick and throttle.

Hi i am always a bit disappointed when i read the stuff about old radar old missile or that all was just a lie to fool congress to make money. All the physics mathematics and aerodynamics that went in this stuff will never get old. Sometimes i get the feeling that moon landing denier and phoenix doubter have a bit in common. Its from the 60s? So old tech it cant be true. This is a insult to all the people of the time that put all there wisdom and skills in it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsR19m2udXE And today a bunch of computer game players talk BS about the missile and radar because they believe a badly made simulation more. Maybe for more balance in there PvP "over G flap out" Growling Sidewinder server shooting R27ETER from the bottom of a caucasus canyon that goes twice as fast as any other SARH missile in game. how knows? About the Puck Howe guy. I would like to go fishing with him to see what he pulls out of the water. AIM-9X maybe? I am sure it will be at least a wall of fish! Taking off the carrier with a broken radar so that you need a good RIO to make it work is not a good example of the capability of the AWG-9. Ward Carroll timeline 40nm? OK fine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38FGpJ_6Js4 but then the AI comes into play...well What do I know? Nothing.

Update: Thanks to @Huilque151 there are now Chile liveries for the Perry. Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3333215/