mmaruda

There is no indication about multicore, but considering the latest developments in CPU tech, it should be a priority as we cannot expect single core performance to increase in a significant way in the near future, if at all. ED has been more or less on top of things business-wise, so I would guess they will be going multicore at some point.

You are all spoiled - I still play some helo "simulators" where infantry are just a bunch of sprites wiggling around. :doh:

Nothing beats URSUS tractors.

So dedicated server will arrive with EDGE? No info on performance makes me a bit sad. However the new ATC is something I was looking forward too - what we have now just kills immersion (not to mention you you can be gliding a smoldering wreck to the strip and still not get clearance because an Apache is taking off). As for the infantry animations, this is a weird one. Considering what a performance hog the 3d infantry models are in large quantities is it really needed? Especially that this is a flight simulator, so we mostly see grunts as little dots right before they get covered with a CBU explosion. :D

I think there is still some issues with units invulnerability. HE rounds from the KA-50 used to kill infantry in dozens when they hit near, now you can drop a cluster bomb from the A-10 on the grunts and don't kill anyone.

What do you mean by not turning on? Not turning on at all, or it is just grey and not showing picture (screen is grey)? If the latter, you need to uncage it first (there is a button for that, needs to be bound to you joystick). If you follow the sturtup procedure: You should be able to use Shkval no problem when uncaged.

Some benchmarks here: http://pclab.pl/art53333-4.html http://pclab.pl/art53333-3.html The links are in Polish, but they are the only test I could find that include simulation games. FSX seems to have a significant boost in relation to Sandy, Arma 2 though, not so much. I wonder how this will perform in DCS.

That is the result of a sort of elitist thinking. Back in the day, Lock On was considered realistic and frowned upon only by the Falcon crowd (though I don't think it happened on a regular basis). Now a lot of people think that unless something has click-able pit, it's 'arcade'. That is just wrong. Personally I consider this a harmful exaggeration as it diminishes anyone who flies FC3 and this is not an easy 'game'. Even without click-able pits it still is hard and demanding. Proper radar operation in air combat requires at least as much attention and knowledge as most of the standard stuff you do in the Ka-50 and A-10C.

BMS will not become history soon for a couple of reason and dynamic campaign is only one of them. There are also other theaters than Korea to fly, the mission planing is outstanding, the F-16 is a multirole aircraft and they are working on the Hornet too (full sim version), not to mention it does not require such a beast hardware as DCS (in fact it has dual core support from the start) and has better networks stability (from my experience at least). Now that said DCS IS superior in terms of simulation detail, but some things need to be improved. For that ED needs money and thus a wide customer base is better. We will not have much chance of regular evolution of DCS, if the customer base is a niche with a niche. I don't think that having more mid-fidelity modules would mean that ED will shift resources from DCS level aircraft. The ability to reach a broader market will mean they have more income and resources for the whole DCS World in general. It's not really a bad thing, it just provides more choice for everyone. If someone does not like full study-sim, that does not exclude them from playing DCS and those who prefer higher fidelity can just not buy the easier stuff.

Well, the early version of the sim had it all wrong - even the AI crashed on the take-off demonstration mission.

Ok, so I got the proper take-off down. Turns out if you follow the exact instructions of the tutorial (MP at 30 before letting off the brakes), there is less side drift. I never went that way, since it did not work in the early beta and I never replayed the tutorials later. Still, I think that the sideways show need to be fixed somehow, at least the gear or tires should brake before you can go all drift king.

Steam is basically something like the Satan of gaming wearing a nice suit an smelling all nice. We all know how convenient it is, how the sales enable us to buy cheap, how easy it is to join an MP game with friend etc... What we neglect however is that we no longer own the games we bought - we just have licenses and Steam can take our access any time of the day for any bullshit reason (for example by using a key bought in another region, because you went to the states and wanted to buy a game cheap). It's also DRM and something that killed pre-owned games on the PC. Something that is currently the big discussion in the console world with the new Xblocks announcement has already happened on the PC and noone noticed. Thanks to Steam. Not that I am a big enthusiast on buying used, but some poor kids could easily benefit from some of my older games which I no longer play, but they cannot - thank you Steam. Somehow used books and libraries never hurt the publishers, how come noone ever uses that argument? Another thing is, Steam can change their license whenever they want, of course you can disagree, but then you loose access to all your games. No refund. I am glad that ED does not go to Steam like Bohemia Interactive did with Arma III (I was quite happy without having it installed)

No pedals is actually easier - I only started having problems when I switched from X-52 to CH. When I used the twisty stick, I had no idea what all those people were talking about in first take-off thread after release. :)

Wolf Rider, the way you put it seems simple, but it takes me several attempts to get airborne after a flying break and the best way is to forget all the tutorials and do it my way: -no trimming of rudder -keep the tail-wheel locked as long as possible -MP around 20 until I reach 90 MPH, than increase and lift of ASAP, before I crash Another thing are the landings - I made an hour-long flight today over the mountains but when I finally came in to land attempting a 3-point touchdown around 90 MPH, the plane went sideways immediately. I drifted like 100 meters and came to a stop. Nothing broke. I have no idea why I went sideways, probably should have landed normally instead of that 3-point attempt, but how on earth did the wheels hold up? In the Su-25, when you land and try turning at that sort of speed, you immediately blow the front tire. The ones in the Mustang seem to be made of titanium. If this ground handling is realistic, how on earth did they train WWII pilots without crashing thousands of planes? Maybe I'm just doing it wrong, but doing stuff according to tutorials and other people's advice usually gets me crashed.

It's really simple - we need a dynamic campaign like BMS has. I don't want to be considered a hater, fanboy, or anything of the extreme sort, but no matter how cool the mission in DCS (so far Miedvied II campaign for Ka-50 is the best IMHO), it's just not close to anything one can experience in Falcon. I never had the time or dedication to start playing it until recently (not to mention I was never a fan of the F-16 - Flanker for life!), but a few good people helped me start and when I got into flying with them in this dynamic environment with good ATC and unpredictable events during a mission I can say that while DCS does stuff better in terms of attention to detail and simulation of a given machine in general, it does not come close to Falcon in terms of immersion. ED needs to do three things to for their product to become top of the line: -finish EDGE and start pumping out new maps... like NOW -add a dynamic campaign -release that damn fighter Do this in the following 1,5 years and you have my eternal love ED.

No point in trying to speculate on conspiracies here. Nevada has not come out, because we are waiting for EDGE. EDGE has not come out, because... potato. It's all in another thread somewhere. As for the Arma 3 devs, they were released on bail after the Greek justice system finished their strike.. Yes that is the country that went bankrupt due to overspending in the public sector and other EU countries still throw money at them to bail them out, though the average salary in Greece is twice the average of my country. And the justice system goes on strike... Anyway, the whole charge was most probably invented in order to put pressure on Bohemia Interactive not to set the game on a crap Island no one has ever heard of until they started making the game, beacuse that would impact the tourism business. Anyway, the name of the in-game island was changed to Altis and the devs were released on bail. Tourism on Lemnos is now safe because the island will no longer be associated with a game war-zone and we all know there is no better advertisement for a tourism resort than getting arrested on vacation and spending 6 months in jails because judges decided to go on strike.

Ok here is my controversial point of view: the ground handling in the Mustang is still broken. :) Anyway what you cannot do i s apply to much throttle at the start. I am not sure about it, but I heard that it is possible to firewall the throttle on take-off in the real plane. In DCS that is a big NO NO. You need to roll slowly to be able to use rudder to control the roll. The main problem here is once you loose control and start spinning out, there is no countering it. My advice? DITCH THE RUDDER TRIM. I found that the whole 4-5 degrees is just what causes problems on take-off. At a slow speed you will actually be pulled to the right, so you counter that and start going left, you counter that too and there comes a weird pendulum effect and eventually you loose control. Without rudder trim all you need to do is use right rudder only, you will have to work more with the foot, but it is actually possible to take off in a straight line instead of being all over the runway. Another curiosity is that this is actually a lot easier with a twisty-stick than pedals.

How about this - each new DCS module is fully realistic with bells and whistles, but instead of 'game mode', you have the option to play at FC3 fidelity level?

The thread is 28 pages - I have better things to do than read through it - sorry. :( What I want to say is... I WOULD PAY RIDICULOUS AMOUNTS OF DOUGH TO HAVE OTHER THEATRES! Seriously ED, you want money, stop all the things you are doing, finish EDGE ASAP and release new maps. Everyone will buy it. EVERYONE (in Garry Oldman voice)!

I was thinking about this for some time now. Last week I had crisis in flying since getting into the A-10C after a break seemed like a second job for me. Sure I like study-sims and a month ago I would say, only DCS quality. Right now I came to this thread again and went for FC3 level. There are a couple of reasons why. Let me start with the general thing: If we only receive DCS quality planes, DCS World will take a loooooong time to grow. There will be few planes, many of them will not be the icons of military aviation (T-2 Buckeye... yeah well... at least they are making a Harrier) due to stuff being classified and so on. I already own all the DCS products that have been released so far, and I do not have enough time to fully enjoy all of them. Real pilots spend most of their career in one or two jets, it takes 5 years to fully train a Viper pilot. I have been thinking quite a lot about it, and I came to the conclusion I will most probably buy only the DCS planes I really like and would like to know more about, but at the same time, I would like to have fun with some other planes and not necessarily devote months on learning them. Lest face it, it's not just about realism. It's about knowing the plane. Is the Su-25T not realistic? All it does not have is a click-able pit and realistic radios. Once you get down to it, most of the click stuff is done on the ramp. And clicking those things with a mouse also has a not so realistic aspect - when a real pilot flips a switch all he has to do is reach out a wiggle his finger, what we need to do is change the view, find the mouse cursor, aim for the switch a not mistake the mouse buttons. Hitting a key on the keyboard IMHO reflects the actual workload more accurately (obviously you need not know where the real switch is). My point is, what people yell about the most here: click-able pits, 6dof, all buttons usable (even if the don't do anything) are not what is most important in a flight sim. The most important feature is always the flight model. Next comes the weapons operation and tactics. The rest is just an opportunity to know how the machine operates and maybe get a a false impression that you could fly the real thing. The fact that I can turn on the wiper in the Shark is cool, but there are times, when I fly in bad weather and would really prefer if instead of that switch being click-able, there was actual rain on the glass and the wiper would not be useless. And then there is the stuff that DCS World lacks in general, and all the immersion is killed instantly: - rain, snow, dust setting on the aircraft, covering the glass etc. - ATC that is something more than a prop (you can crap all over the procedures and they won't say a word) - more realistic looking airfields - collide-able trees - ground crews - the unsung heroes of any air battle - a dynamic campaign and radio chatter - cool, '90s-style animations during briefings I could go on... What I am trying to say is, I would like to fly many aircraft in DCS, but not necessarily learn all of them in detail. I would gladly pay for a Tomcat, but the DCS Hornet is probably the module I am least excited about - I'm just not a fan of it. An FC3 fidelity-level module (with AFM) would suit me better in this case. Also DCS quality only means we will never get to fly planes like the F-22 or F-117. I think ED should balance things out. We need both DCS and FC3 quality stuff (AFM is a must on the other hand, no compromises on my part here) and we also need the whole core engine to evolve and realeasing a product every once every couple of years will not finance that too fast.

I remember that very well, I would go to the arcade and watch all the rich kids play - I could not afford it. Thanks for bringing back some sad childhood memories. :cry:

You need to use a little right pedal, it's explained earlier why (works that way in the real thing). That basically makes the ball on the slip indicator centred and stops the wobbling. You will still need to make an adjustment here and there just like in the real heli, but this is nothing compared to the old FM.

I'm no expert on choppers, but you can feel the machine better now. It is easier, but still demanding and less unpredictable. Everyone who had trouble earlier on should now be able to learn to fly no sweat. I just hope they won't change it because someone says it's not that hard anymore. FM should be tweaked to reflect the real machine and harder does not always mean more realistic, so if that's what real pilots say it should be, they should be the authority on this.

You mean the curves in the CM?