Temetre

Imo it would be nice to get some information on that before pre-ordering. Like, estimated, how much memory is full Afghanistan gonna be, how will does it perform at release (and later with more optimization) compared with Syria, for example? I would expect high quality from the map, the trailer speaks for itself, but performance is always a big issue in DCS. Multithreading is nice, but object density, RAM/VRAM usage and disk usage is pushing a lot of systems to the maximum already.

Tbh as muhc as I love destructible terrain in games, its usually very difficult to make work technically and performance wise. Especially in massive open world games as DCS. Stuff like runway destruction shouldnt be as difficult tbf.

Tbh theres more talk around explaining the weird sales models than there is selling the map to us. Like, why is this map 70 bucks worth, when eg Syria was 50? Why should we buy another map with very similar terrain to the other ones? Tell us why the map is worth buying, besides the very basic marketing blips. The map certainly looks cool, come on ED, sell us the idea of the map and why your approach is special. Splitting the maps up like this also seems nedlessly complicated, as indicated by the amount of questions it creates; even the long FAQ doesnt exaplain everything. Theres now gonna be 7 different combinations of the 3 map versions; and compatability of missions/campaigns/servers will be kind of a struggle, since terrain quality will affect visibility even in BFM, let alone anything ground based. When I dogfight using the low quality version, will just be able to dive into where cities would be, and the high quality players seems me warping through buildings?

Oh thats finnally been fixed? Cool!

Ive also seen Zabu on the Discord mention some pretty big bugs: For example it was like, whenever the target altitude would be above current planet altitude, the pod would just go stupid and revert to fallback mode. They did make a version with fixed software and stuff later. I think the HB F-4 will have both versions.

Aye, so also might be a maintenance issue in Vietnam? Or pilot mistake, wouldnt be the first time that causes issues with new tech (see Sparrow^^).

Thx

Wait so the F1M has no IFF interrogator either? I thought it was upgrade with one

You already got good answers, but ive heard some anecdotes about Dive Toss. Apparently some pilots disliked it, but a few also got really well trained in it and had really good results. So its definitely been used to effect, even if it wasnt always popular. I imagine thats also gonna be the most commonly used mode, its amazing in the A4 SKyhawk.

Yes, I also had the autopilot stop working after a dogfight in the F-1EE. Wonder if its an issue with INS or magnetic compass being confused? Or mb I needed to use the throttles autopilot lever/button in combination with the AP-button to reenable it Could be degraded systems or user error.

Well put. I always like to point out how much of the combat is about the environment. Sure the F-18 gives you a ton of situational awareness, but you will absolutely need that awareness when you deal with modern SAMs and missiles. When you sit in a 70s scenario in a Phantom or Mirage F1, you wont face as many scary things. And heck, those two for example are well ahead of most of the competition (like Mig-21s). The "easy of flying" really isnt that big of a deal. Ive learned flying in IL2 Sturmovik, flying WW2 fighter aircraft. Only difficult thing is visibility while landing imo. F-4 is probably gonna be luxury compared to that.

So theres ways to start the F-4 with rapid alignment, which limits the alignment process to 2.25 minutes, rather than 10 (or sometimes even 20) minutes for highest accuracy. (ignoring stored heading) What systems would suffer from such a rapid alignment? Obviously the nav computer error becomes bigger, but the WRCS, Radar and sight are also all fed information from the INS; but its not clear to what extend those are hurt, if at all. From Zabu we also know that Pave Spike stabilization is worse. Couldnt really find information about the effects of poor alignment from a short skim of the manual.

Yeh, and apparently tried in test aircraft, but those were probably wired specifically for that role then.

I find this requirement for 2FA for tirlas really disappointing, the Google Authenthicator comes with a ton of issues. From privacy issues, security concerns, to potentially getting locked out of an account (eg if the smartphone breaks). Using GA will actually reduce my general level of security, not enhance it. In the meanwhile, I never ever had a problem with an account (connected to paid content) getting stolen, in my entire life. This also follow a path of ED that just seems disrespectful for its customers and supporters. The lockout of steam/standalone being used at the same time, and now the forced 2FA is creating an ever less pleasant user experience with more restrictions and garbage forced onto me. @BIGNEWY I hope ED is getting some feedback about how their treatment of costumers has been getting more obnoxious. Im willing to deal with the aggressive DRM and high pricing, because they make amazing stuff. But limiting access to this is getting more problematic.

Tbh I think a lot of people here got a quite america- or at least vietnam-centric view. That is DCS though. The plane variants are so exact, you almost never get a perfect matchup for anything. Thats just not possible. The F-4E well get is imo a good choice because its quite versatile, especially if you limit equipment.

According to the manuals ive seen only outboard and center station take brrt pods

Tbf im meming too. But yeh, armchair internet discussions are fun. After all were pretend flying military aircraft in a video game

Oh you too?

First time on the internet?

Tbf its a bit of a guessing game, but my money is on the F-4E being generally more agile and capable than the Mig-21Bis. The Mig has high instantaneous turn, but thats the only thing it got really. And maybe the emergency afterburner, but thats more of a gimmick. I tend to believe that the Mig-21Bis in DCS is unrealistically controllable at high AoA though. Its quite easily flyable up to 30 AoA or so, and only then departs. In reality it probably would be worse than the F-14, with control close to 30 AoA becoming ever harder. Ofc thats all speculation, Im very curious to see where the plane will fall. So the early E would suffer even more? In that case this seems like a strange statement indeed. With the F-15 A-C Id be way more ready to believe it. Thank you for expanding on the Viper bit! While I dont fully disagree, Id be willing to argue just a bit against that: Air supremacy isnt about destroying fighters, its about controlling the air space and limiting the enemy ability to do things with aircraft. The US still managed to drop a huge amount of bombs on Vietnam; the SAM/AA-coverage limited their effectiveness, just like in Kosovo, but it didnt effectively stop the bombing. With more of a direct challenge to american air supremacy, Hanoi wouldve had an easier time Id feel. In Ukraine nobody really has true air supremacy, its a mostly contested airspace. Hence fighters and Helis are very limited in what they can do there.

Idk if Aerges can optimize texture usage, but mind its a quite detailed module, and the BE with two seats naturally takes more memory. Similarly the F-14 or F-15E have more FPS impact because theyre two-seaters.

Mig-21s in Vietnam were more of a minor factor in the war, no matter how interesting that bit of history is historically and especially to americans. Otoh, Mig-21Bis was built in the thousands, it might actually be the most produced variant of the Mig-21, and its interesting for not being an export model. The iranian F-14s saw the most combat, but theyre the odd ones out. Theyre not US-Navy carrier aircraft, which is the purposeful design of the plane, and only make up a fraction of the >700 F-14s built. Neither can you claim an 80/90s F-14 A/B is the most modern one. As for the F-16, they were around for Desert Storm, Afghanistan, Iraq War and make up to this day one of the most used modern fighter jet in the world? Maybe not always in the most recent C-version, but having a modern networked 2000s jet is obviously pretty relevant as well. Still not the most modern version of it btw, those models are almost 20 years old now. Gotta be honest, a lot of the time people say "DCS always has the newest and coolest variant", those people then ask for early and rather unique variants of the planes instead. That just makes no sense, not even as a hyperbole. Even if you ignore the weird implication that earlier variants are somehow inherently more relevant than newer variants.

Just a guess, maybe its connected to video memory usage? You hit 9gb of your 10gb in that one screen, and with continually worsening performance it could be a culprit. Easiest check would be to just lower textures to minimum and see if the issue persists.

Its hard to draw judgement calls from early anecdotes like that tho. Also, are we talking F-14s with TF-30s, and are early F-15Es lighter? In that case it wouldnt be hard to judge why they mightve felt that way. F-14B is quite a different beast Id say.

I think that was more the result of the reformers/fighter mafia pushing low tech fighters. But mind that their conclusions were mostly wrong, and the Viper mainly got good when they put a bunch of tech into it. Afaik the Vietnam results of the F4 wasnt much about the planes dogfighting performance really. More about lack of BFM training, and fighting from a very difficult position. Mind there was a huge number of F-4s carried bombs or escorted strike groups, which mostly got threatened by SAMs and got very rarely ambushed by Migs. So the Migs almost always had the upper hand at the start of the battle. When the Migs got baited into longer dogfights, it seems like the Phantoms often won out. At the end of the war the Phantoms had a 3 to 1 kill ratio against Migs though. So even with those problems they proved superior in A2A combat, which includes dogfights and "no-BVR" rules. Subsonic designs like Mig-15/17 might have inherently good low speed handling tho, compared to supersonic fighters.... not sure