King_Hrothgar

I was referring to the original IL2 from 2002 but honestly it goes back further than that. DCS's damage modeling is a legacy from the 1990's Flanker games. I don't think it's ever been updated tbh. So yeah, it was dated even in LOMAC but it didn't matter since all the planes had gatling guns and missiles. Now that we have more lightly armed aircraft with many more coming, the details matter. To that end, I'd like to see AI aircraft suffer engine damage, fuel leaks, control failures and pilot wounding (added to player aircraft too). None of these are terribly CPU intensive. AI engine damage can be as simple as putting a multiplier on their overall thrust. For liquid cooled engines, a coolant leak could be added. Under the hood this wouldn't be anything more than a timer for an engine failure. Fuel leaks don't do anything but alter fuel usage, so that's no big deal either. It's just a constant added to the end of the fuel usage equation. Control damage is straight forwards, the left aileron either works or it doesn't. If AI aircraft aren't modeled that detailed, then a multiplier to the roll/pitch/yaw rate can be used instead. Pilot wounding can also be approached easily. Once again, a simple multiplier will do the trick. The current standard is for wounded pilots to have reduced control authority and a reddened screen (similar to blackout effect). For AI aircraft, the screen reddening is replaced with a reduced visibility ring multiplier. These relatively simple additions to DCS's damage model would not bring it fully up to modern standards (structural damage, cascading failures and so on), but it's a good place to start. It would be an enormous improvement over what we have even if stopped at the few suggestions I made.

Yeah, no. I prefer my runways stationary.

I made the switch over the weekend as well. I Didn't deactivate any modules and so far none have prompted a reactivation. But I haven't tried them all yet either. All my stuff works fine too, no issues with controllers or anything like that. I didn't have a measurable change in FPS with DCS or anything else. It also runs fine with RoF, BoS and Rome II.

I'd rather they simply update the damage model to at least the standard 10 years ago. I don't think it would eat up too much CPU power since it was done just fine 10+ years ago on the single core CPU's of the time. That desired damage model update applies to both AI and player aircraft.

A 1970's F-4E (with mavericks) would be my pick. I suppose an F-4J would be an acceptable stand in for an F-4E but why not just do it properly to begin with? As for the whole cold war thing, I prefer to simulate actual wars rather than make believe ones. The F-4 fought the MiG-21 on many occasions across multiple versions of both planes. The same is true of the Mirages and F-5's. Even the F-104 faced them in combat but the EE Lightning? I'm not sure. VEAO has it on their development wishlist anyways, so not much point in arguing for it. I should probably mention the F-4E isn't at the top of my wishlist. I prefer attack helicopters and single seat fighters/attackers. I'd mostly go for it for the sake of its wartime significance from 1960 to 1990.

The 3d models are pretty, but pretty 3d models are cheap. VEAO dropped this team because they (including VEAO) couldn't come up with the people to program the systems and flight model. I wish them the best but I don't have any expectation of this actually being released for DCS. I think they are also an FSX developer though, so it might find its way there if it hasn't already.

That's the thing, 1954 isn't exactly modern is it? You wouldn't consider a 1954 car modern would you? What about a boat or a civilian plane? How about a computer? Why would a military plane count but nothing else? Push that example to 1970 and nothing changes. It's only in the 1990's that the answer starts getting difficult to answer. It isn't until the mid 2000's where the answer becomes easy again.

True, but as you said, they never flew over the USSR itself either.

In the case of the SR-71, the MiG-31 happened.

That's something that's bothered me too. Many here take a lot of liberties with the word "modern." I've seen it stretched to mean anything post WW2 by some. I'm much more strict when I say modern as I don't consider the F-14 modern and find the F/A-18C questionable. I'm not sure where Cobra falls on the spectrum. In regards to the MiG-25PD and F-4, they don't fit the hints provided. Yes, I'd love to have them and both are high on my wishlist for fixed wing aircraft, but they don't appear to be in the works by anyone. And the MiG-25 is a plane that's a bit controversial. The problem is it's basically the 1970's equivalent of an Me-262. Flown properly, it should be untouchable but flown properly is a way that many players would find boring. Hence some would love it while many others would hate it.

Impossible to say what people have done to their systems besides updating the OS. Maybe he moved the plugs around? In any case, my X-55 and CH pedals had no change from 8.1 to 10. But there is one other possible source of a problem and that's using the profile software to have the joystick emulate a keyboard. Other than adjusting some global deadzones and response curves, I don't use Saitek's profile tool. So it is possible the profile tool maybe messed up even if the drivers themselves are fine. That would explain the different experience assuming power isn't a problem.

I installed Win10 today and played RoF, BoS and DCS. I encountered no issues. The issues described above look an awful lot like the usual insufficient power issue the X-55 is known for. Give it more electricity and it should work just fine.

I use the compass, map and Mk.I eyeball for most of my navigation needs. Sometimes I use the RSBN for getting to a distant airfield of interest, but I don't use the system for typical waypoints.

Fixed

Never even seen a static display of any Mirage aircraft, but still really looking forwards to this one. Thanks for the update.

It was just a thought. The planes I proposed are also not particularly capable.

I was in a UH-1 for the event, but I fly the Ka-50 regularly on various servers. In my experience: 1) The same as most other DCS aircraft include the FC3 ones. 60+ in a server is fine so long as the server is powerful enough to handle that many clients. The only issue is DCS doesn't handle large numbers of objects well. I don't recommend putting more than 20 aircraft of any type, including AI, within 50km of each other. 2) DCS doesn't handle a lot of bullets or clusterbombs well in general. So high rate of fire weapons such as miniguns and the Mi-8's MG pods can cause a lot of problems. A-10's and Su-25's spamming cluster bombs are also problematic. Ka-50's with their very low RoF cannon, missiles and rockets don't cause problems. On a related note, I have ideas on some future missions. Below are some broad strokes: 1) Russian backed forces vs rebels: Mi-8's + MiG-21's (or L-39's once released). Same basic setup as our last mission, but with those aircraft instead. 2) Same as 1, only with western aircraft such as UH-1H + Hawk T.1A 3) Epic tank battle: 16+ Ka-50 vs more Abrams, Bradly's and M1097 Avengers than you can count. Ideally this would be setup to defend greatly inferior friendly ground forces or to support a ground attack. I'm not sure on how well this would run given the numbers involved, but it would be pretty epic if it can be done. It might have to wait for DCS 1.5.

That seems very unlikely due to rarity of information and the inevitable fury if such an oddball version were chosen. A Viggen (strongly hinted at, almost F-14 level) and a standard issue WW2 pacific fighter seem the two most likely candidates. Both the F4U and F6F are good candidates for the WW2 fighter, but I think it's safe to assume it would be a standard F4U-1a/d or F6F-3/5. No crazy night fighter or recon variants are likely.

Yes, which the Viggen has.

The MiG-25PD is very high on my fixed wing wishlist and no, we don't have enough Russian aircraft. Now I'd say we don't have enough DCS level aircraft in general at the moment, but looking forwards the Russians are in bad shape. Why? The following jet fighter modules are officially in development by teams with a reasonable chance of delivering sometime in the next year or two: Western: F-5E, F-14A/B, F-18C, Mirage 2000C, EF2000, Vampire, Meteor. Eastern: Nothing. The MiG-25PD and MiG-23MLA + MLD would go a long ways towards evening it up a bit. That said, all hints at LNS's unknown modules currently point to WW2 pacific something and the Viggen. And I do think the Viggen will be fairly interesting. But moving forwards, I really hope LNS gives Russia a bit of love since it seems no one else is interested in doing so.

It's true the gun isn't very accurate at more than 3km, but with short bursts and a steady bird you can get a few rounds on target.

RCS?

Was a lot of fun and the first time I had an opportunity to use the UH-1 in a proper mission for it. Also thanks to the host, no lag and smooth as can be expected given the abuse we were giving DCS with that mission.

Hover 3.5-4km away, target him, snipe with cannon. HE works best.

The fixed AAA has a max range of 2.5km, so they are fairly easy to go around even without knowing their exact location. You can also fly above them sometimes, though that's more difficult. In any case, they are generally located in and around towns, facilities and checkpoints. You won't typically find them in the middle of a big open field. So if you think fixed AAA is around, then simply avoid overflying any buildings you haven't checked out thoroughly with your camera. Another good method is to tell your AI wingman to target air defenses. The AI sees absolutely everything, even stuff behind mountains, so they will get it all provided they live long enough. For this to work, clear out what you can, especially any SAMs, and then tell your AI to go after air defenses. Typically they will get all the hidden manpads and AAA as they go after those by what is closest. But they do prioritize SAMs, even ones that are not a threat. So you do have to keep a close eye on them as they will charge off on a suicide run to kill a BUK site 200km away on the other side of a mountain range if you let them. And the AI will fly through a nest a shilkas to do it too.:doh: