Leaderboard

Status update I'm still working on the Russian asset pack update. But the latest DCS updates added some issues which I had to deal with. Here is a screenshot of the latest addition to the pack.

Hi As promised, we have dropped a list of original destructible objects. And now we will supplement it with screenshots and coordinates. Wipe your sights! Open list: 360 Building Adana HiltonSA Aleppo International Airport Terminal Aleppo thermal power plant Atatürk Barajı (Dam Ataturk) 1 Atatürk Barajı (Dam Ataturk) 2 Damascus International Airport Terminal Damascus Tower Euphrates dam Four Seasons Hotel Damascus Gaziantep Havalimanı Airport Terminal Haifa Refinery Cooling Towers KEAN Soft Drinks Factory Lafarge cement plant Larnaca International Airport Terminal Nicosia International Airport Terminal Olympic Residence Panorama Towers Paphos International Airport Terminal Rafik Hariri International Airport Terminal Sail Tower Sama Beirut Sheraton Grand Adana SkyGate Syrian Presidential Palace Tishrin Dam Platinum Tower P.S.: watched the video - it turned out to be a fiery video response

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/stable/2.9.9.2474/ DCS 2.9.9.2474 DCS - Core Game Fixed: crash that was induced by some modules using custom effect presets. (This crash was top in our crash reporting track system. Please keep sending crashes when able, it helps us determine and prioritize fixes, Thank you!)

Just a reminder This is NOT payware 2 of the best modders in the entire DCS community https://ko-fi.com/taesimulations Buy them a coffee to help continue their awesome work

I think the sentiment has been there for a very long time, and people have given ED a chance... But the game is big on promises and potential, but falls pretty hard in terms of practical execution of many things that "other sims" got right on day 1. The complaints about the core game have gone back years and its still nowhere near what it should be and the standard "its complicated" excuses have worn thin. I'll give credit to ED for improving performance, that was a big task and they did manage to do it. But it was an existential task, if they didn't do it, DCS would be dead. Similarly improving the core game stuff is the next existential task, and the list of what needs to change is pretty large, and everyone has different priorities. I listed some of what I thought was important earlier, but frankly I have little hope for improvements on most of it because its clear to me that what I consider important isn't important to ED. But I'm far from alone in that crowd. I mean you can go back every few years and find similar videos to this, the "beautiful mess" one from a few years back has exactly the same message, fix the core game, and then there are famous former DCS celebs that have said the same thing. And yet over the years basically nothing has changed in that regard. So ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, for the time being I'm out of passion and support.

I strongly agree with this (although I'd add that imo ED is "ambitious" in a positive sense of that word) DCS (and its predecesser versions) has evolved to something extraordinary/unique and I feel kinda sorry for the devs that lately there seems to be this strong, very vocal, movement of (what appears to be mainly new) unsatisfied DCS players. I'm not judging anyone here and all should of course feel free to express their concerns, but what I don't like, is all these posts saying stuff like "we want change". Not sure why anyone would feel entitled to speak for everyone. I'm very happy that we have DCS and I have all the trust in ED knowing what's best for DCS. Do I like to see improvements to specific DCS features? Of course I do. But I'm also very aware, that what I want, may not be what is best for DCS to evolve further. I (or in this case I dare to say "we" ) jsut don't know the bigger picture. I hope all this spreading negative flow (it's even worse on YouTube I noticed), will soon make place for positivity (Kumbaya, my lord Kumbaya )

Check Six Simulations

On the MB-339, during IFR training, the instructor is supposed to be on the front seat to have major visibility. This is for flight safety purposes. Installing a IFR hood on the front seat it would affect the instructor visibility, and the instructor must be aware of everything. Inviato dal mio SM-F731B utilizzando Tapatalk

Being too ambitious ends up like Star Citizen. But to be honest I do not really think you can compare DCS with SC, at least here there's a game to play, and what a game! I've spent countless hours myself enjoying DCS and I still continue to use it, I can't deny the truth nor it's my intention. Nevertheless, the more you go deep in the sim and the more you see the huge amount of bigger and smaller bugs affecting ANY module, being it in EA or already released since years. And I'm not talking of the countless features we are waiting for in the core game. As it is now DCS, with reference to single player experience, is a cockpit simulator, and I'm fine with it. But I would demand at least a full working one, not something that as soon as you go a little deeper into the procedures, the bugs come out left and right, and when you report them you find that they have "already reported"... since decades! I do not know if this behaviour is due to the growing list of active modules, but this is undeniable and often very frustrating. Just an example: the a-10c airport divert page. It shoud give you the ATC frequency of the selected airport, but there's a bug for which you have **** instead of the frequency. This is a bug reported since DCS 2.0 came out, they have reviewed the a-10c with the version II, adding a lot of new stuff, but those bug is still there, and has been reported dozens of times, since years ago. It may seem a minor annoyance (and really it is), but ALL modules none excluded are full of stuff like this. What do I do with the mig-29 if all this stuff instead of being fixed continue to increase from update to update? I may have written "we" in some of my previous posts: I apologize. I'm no one to speak for the community and I don't even intend to: this is just how I see it. But tell me it's not true...

Yes, this exactly. It's perfectly fine to express your own opinion, good or bad. The moment someone starts a post with "we" or "it's a consensus", I immediately discard that person's opinion. Ofc it's a lot easier to moan about the bad sides, they are easier to spot as they do have a direct negative impact on your gameplay, but very rarely you see people praising the good sides. I see a lot of people here just listing all the bad things with DCS, everything that bugs them, but very few make contrasting notes of how much time they have spent playing and how much enjoyment DCS have brought to them. After all, you wouldn't notice all of the bad stuff if you haven't spent enough time. Personally, I do think ED might have stretched themselves a bit thin with just how many modules they do have in active development as after all they do have a finite amount of developers. They don't grow on trees, they can't work 24/7 and with ever increasing amount of scrutiny and I would say overly pedantic reviews from players, they sure as hell do need to spend awful lot of time just learning the matter and then they have to teach computers to do that stuff. It seems a lot of people are forgetting that when coding things, unless you program something, that doesn't happen. IRL dependencies do not automagically translate into the computer world, someone has to code it. On the other hand, I know that ED doesn't particularly care what I think and they are correct to think that way. They have a vision for DCS (rather, I really hope they do) and they should stick to it. Sure, every now and then put out a feelers with the community, see what they are most excited for, but they should never budge from their plans just because the community thinks otherwise. The community doesn't know all that's going on behind the scenes (nor should they), but they want everything and want it now. You obviously can't please that, so stick to your plans and ensure you do them. To wrap it up, DCS has brought me far more enjoyable hours of my life than the miserable ones due to bugs or whatnot, so hats off to that and I hope for many more to come.

Please consider that a lot of players are using 2D not VR and fly mostly SP missions. Better to make spotting dots a server setting so that competitive servers can turn if off for competitive PvP MP without killing it for everyone in every kind of mission. The AI will still have superior vision in SP and in PvE MP environments even if the dots are turned off.

I'd say, per Nessuno's post above, that ED's only real 'problem' is that they're too ambitious. They get criticized with comparisons to FBMS, 3rd Party Module aircraft, etc... when they are taking on 25 times more work and complexity with full-fidelity, advanced (and immensely popular) airframes, maps, campaigns...etc. And then they have the core game itself. They will never win. I just hope they don't get discouraged. I for one just loaded up a rainy day mission on the Supercarrier in the Hornet, with Tomcats and other jets crowding the deck... and I had absolutely no frame drops or hiccups in 2D. A year ago, with the same mission and setup, my FPS would've dropped into the teens when looking at the deck Island, and that with even lower settings than I'm currently running. They just slowly get this sim better and better. But, yes...they are WAY too ambitious. And they are still the best overall air combat sim in town...bar none.

Nope! Not defending anything, just saying that this should be discussed in a separate thread and leave this thread to discuss setting up and issues found with certain sticks etc.

Hello dear pilots! Our team is working hard on a new project, but since all restrictions have already been lifted, we have in development: RamatDavidAirbase TabukAirport MezzehAirport DamascusInternationalAirport RaficHaririInternationalAirport We are also discussing and making a scenario for the Israeli-Arab war campaign. It will be free (we haven't done it yet, and we will discuss it with the ED team) PS: We are also making all military bases of Egypt and Israel (including the Golan Heights), we plan to mark them on the map in ME

https://aka.ms/vs/17/release/vc_redist.x64.exe (direct link) This thing perfectly fixed the situation. Stable game, no glitches, no issues. I have stressed both sim and PC in many ways, no problem. As soon as I download the Phantom module, BOOM! A complete disaster. The only way so far is to ignore that plane, uninstall it and enjoy the rest. dcs.log-20241106-173412.zip

The gift that keeps on giving!

DCS is always getting these unfair comparisons to old games which were probably 40x easier to make decades ago. I’m pretty sure a single module today is more work than an entire game was back then.

No worries mate, I'm sure they're just waiting with more teasers, until they've finished adding Volkel Air Base

I will ask the teams to take a look. thank you

Все оружие будем делать мы сами, чтобы исключить "зоопарк".

2 proposals for the next release: 1) Hotkey for chaff/flares; 2) FAB-1500 UMPK.

No. Shoddy practices by Moza the company is totally on topic when discussing their product. And IMO way more important then any kind of functionality quirks. Theft of code allegations look very plausible. very sad to see people defending this kind of practice.

Also very interested in this! P.S. Wishing you all the best, Admiral!

IN_TheStreamRun_Bo105_(F10N)(StartUpFlyBy)_2020-04_08.mp4 BO-105 Theme by Ingo Nasse

I agree with you, but that's how ED treats ww2. We not only paid for the aircraft and maps. But also spent money on a paid asset pack. Yet we are treated as second class citizens. ED doesn't make moeny on WW2, so ww2 is the lowest of lowest priority. I have everything ww2, but honestly don't play much any more as I'm tired of the only thing ww2 gets is bugs. Nothing of major importance has come to ww2 dcs since the Mossie and the Mossie itself is mostly left for dead. Jets got BVR AI updates and BFM AI updates. But ww2 AI is the same it has been for 10 years.

@currenthill ... because you are updating russian assets pack ... one thing that this side is heavily missing is about some infantry with AT missiles ... even if ED will come up later with some of those... for now they are having only the outdated RPGs, while the blue guys have more advanced weapons... pretty please .. maybe you can find something within your library... just one : AT14/AT13 whatever...

Yes. For the same reason dot labels are a setting. And in many cases the spotting dots are larger and visible from farther away than labels.

Thank you, I watched the first track and I am assuming after reading this that you are wondering the same as I am, what evasion tactics are the SAM systems doing if any. I did try turning on the 'Evasion of ARMs' and not seeing much difference if any, so I am looking into it now. Thanks. If I am missing anything else let me know.

Quick update. Mappings are pretty much complete and I'm happy with it's re-positioning and orientation. Have to say that the combination of VR, the AB9 and jetseat make flying a good deal more immersive. Just quote a certainly fast food place, "I'm lovin' it".

I love this sim. Let's take a page out of the civilian sim's deck, and remember there are 15M flight simmers, of which 3M are hard core, and 6M are "digital tourists". We are a small market, and it is in all our best interests to see this industry grow. ED has given me great times and great memories. Here's to wind in your sails.

Yes, western RWR tuning in plan

I mean, it's not that no one has ever talked about the actual in-game missile performance ever, eh... Missile kinematics I/II: https://flyandwire.com/2023/06/09/missiles-kinematics-part-i-time-factor-and-loft/ Missile kinematics III: https://flyandwire.com/2023/07/27/missiles-kinematics-part-ii-cold-war-era/ Video about the "best" Phoenix variant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9V_A1gjiKE DCS missile performance visualised: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urL9PKusXho And there's a lot more, Google helps.

Daily MiG-29 Russian 9.19s

One might have guessed Thank you for clarifying, makes sense.

LOL. Hey man, if I could control the AI, or if the AI would do 20% of what they would be asked to do, without using black magic, i'd be putting 2 campaigns out every month But honesty, from how many hours it takes to build a mission, between 30 and 40 hours of work, 80% of that is AI.

What's confusing about "DCS: Roadmap (unofficial - NO DISCUSSION HERE)" thread? There are many plans or hints for future development there. And it's unofficial.

I think the problem here is, that T.A. wrongly associates LAU with the warhead of the weapon. LAU is only the rail that enables a connection between an aircraft and a weapon. If you choose AGM-65D on LAU-117 it will be the exact same Maverick as if you load it up on LAU-88. So it is your choice to either use one LAU over another. It does not affect the weapon's warhead. Hope my explaining is clear as English is not my first language.

Hi ED, When you're working on the Western part of the map, could you make sure the terrain mesh around 35°20'38.4"N 61°11'20.4"E is nicely resolved? Kokari-Sharshari was the second biggest base of the Afghan Mujahedeen and the site of operation Trap - one of the biggest airborne assaults of that war. null

Another quick flight tonight after the second ED hotfix. Several Hot LZ rescues before shutting her down for the night.

Bullsh*t. The one that most were looking for? LOL Anyone with even half a clue wouldn't take advice from this guy. Clearly full of himself, and claims that the reason people can't get the most out of these new Intel pieces of junk is that they don't know how to do it without him. Get a 7800X3D if your competency is low...what an a$$ clown. He's not 'telling it like it is" just because he can't say three words without flinging an F-bomb. Unless you do what he says, it's not worth sh*t. If you don't purchase his "course" you'll never be able to do it. Plenty of people were overclocking CPUs, *years* before this yo-yo....yet he's the only one who can get it right. And you have to pay for a course? Wow. What a "f***ing" loser. PS He's also not the only person who uses his own money (only, as in no sponsor bias) to run a shop, test components, and make recommendations - only some people do it without trying to hawk their 'course' lol

There is a new setting coming in 2.9.9 very few seems talking about, the rain droplets has new options high and low. And the low setting makes the visibility better, thus, less scary.

This is still a wonderful plane. I made a mission similar with the one in the movie above just yesterday and it was awesome! Updates would be appreciated!

Daily MiG-29 Russian 9.19s

Если что вот ру мануал который в работе, пока переведено и отредактировано не много, так что не судите строго Руководство F-4E - Heatblur F-4E Phantom II

I really hope you guys find a way to keep the mod alive. Video I shot today over our Dynamic Vietnam mission with the OV-10. She is much more appreciated than you know and a lot of people would hate to see her disappear, especially they guys on my server. Thanks for the hard work earlier on into this mod. Please do not abandoned it if possible, it is an iconic aircraft with a longer and larger history than most people know!

No offence but i would not fire phoenix at anything more distance than 15 nm from 25k feet. Personally if i want to hit anything BVR wise (in F14 more than 15nm) i would climb to at least 40k, In F14 Alt beats speed to use 54 in BVR. And in closer ranges vs su27, just fox 3 at 15nm and go cold, bandit has to go cold or he will die.

Just know all, I will shamelessly lock this thread if it goes off the rails. I have made sure that management is aware of the video, and both me and BN have raised our concerns which are much of your concerns. So please do not turn on each other or go off the deep end if you feel this thread is still helpful. Thanks.

null