Katmandu

In 2.5.1 the sound auto switched to Rift headphones. If you don't want to use them and prefer speakers, disable rift headphones in windows audio settings or wait for the next update.

The more I think about it, the better the "F-22 vs PAK-FA vs EF2000 vs F-35" is beginning to sound. 1.We are unlikely to ever see any of these craft fully modelled. 2. Of all the devs in the world I would trust ED - with all of their wealth of experience and know how - to model these craft on the available info and fill the gaps where this info is not available. Nobody could do this job better. 3. This would bring in the new blood, no doubt about it. Yeah, I love Tornados as well, but come on :)

@1:28:28

And this labor is massively, HUGELY appreciated - many thanks, MadDogIC! DCS is itself "a labor of love" I feel, it is so at odds with so much that is going on with the gamedev today and over the past ten years... :v: That's a good point! Bear Trap and other fighter campaigns are certainly less affected by the new Caucasus map (F-15's Bear Trap seems to run flawless to me), groundpounders may be quite different in that regard. EDIT: Completed the Bear Trap today -hooray me and many thanks again, MadDog-IC!

FC4 planes need to appeal to a broader audience so no AMX, BAC, Su-15/17, F-15A etc. FC planes with AFM require a lot of research to make and stopping short of making a full module may not make sense - unless "delicate" regulations, like in Nick Gray's response about modern Russian craft. Mig-23/27 are old enough to be declassified probably and if that's the case I'd rather see them as full modules (with optional FC control scheme :D). Same with Century fighters. Therefore, there are two ways in which FC4 can take shape: Option 1 would be conversions from full sim modules united into a single standalone and then we could have Mig-23/27, F/A-18C, F-16C, F-4E/F-14 (ED-Belsimtek collaborating with Heatblur - I'm allowed to dream:)). The other would be creation of unique planes that are too "delicate" to be made into full sim and then we could see something like F-35, F-22, Pak-Fa, EF2000/Rafale. Possibly Mig-25/31 but it would be a boring module as gameplay would be all beyond visual range and eject if somebody got close. Both have their pluses, I personally hope for FC controls to be included with every full sim anyway, so unique "delicate" planes would be great. On the other hand, if full modules do not get FC options, I'd rather have option 1.

I am playing through the Bear Trap right now, using patch from here https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/index.php?CREATED_BY=MadDog-IC&set_filter=Y&sphrase_id=8347897 (many thanks, MadDog-IC). I skipped the earlier missions as I played them before, but the missions starting from "Defend base against Bombers" have worked perfectly well. Even the infamously difficult for the AI "Attack on Nalchik" and "Attack on Mozdok" - the SEAD flights have moved in when I called them and killed SAMs as they they were supposed to. Bottom line: not sure how it is with the vanilla version, but the fixes above work great in 2.5.1 - in Bear Trap at very least.

Да, так звук в колонки вернулся. Спасибо!

Awesome news! https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3465510&postcount=1 Both in terms of direct implications (FC4 sounds great!) and possible side effects concerning the likes of this thread (no more "no more FC" :D) .

Да, я еще не ковырял эту проблему, но в релизе звук шел в колонки, а теперь он автоматом вдруг переключился на наушники Окулуса. Пока еще не понятно, легко ли это исправить или нет, пока только в настройках Окулус Хоум посмотрел -там ничего нет для звука.

It is part of the default FC3 now in 2.5.1, no separate download needed. If you have FC3 installed choose Create Fast mission and you'll see it available.

Yeah, would be interesting to hear from OP again, not sure what he meant. AFM/PFM is fun as the plane feels alive at the edge of flight envelope (and su25 had AFM in FC1), without crazy scripted departures. I wouldn't say F15 is significantly harder to fly now compared to FC1, certainly not to the extent where you can fly FC1 no problem and then crash and burn with AFM. I thought he meant he was getting shot down... We'll see if he replies.

Must be a 2.5 thing as I have completed the entire campaign a while back and it gave me nothing but pleasure :) Make a post in the bugs thread or wait for the campaign to appear in release patch notes.

Вчера летал кампанию Bear Trap (миссии атака Нальчика и Моздока) и Гадфлаи сбили просто тучу крылатых ракет. Баг другой заметил: эффект линзы появился при виде от первого лица (летал в ВР, ф15,Кавказ, версия последняя 2.5.1).

But then surely one would start with icons before game mode, invulnerability and other advices in this thread. Although the name of the thread should also be "Targets are very difficult to spot in DCS", not "FC3 is very difficult" :) OP, try icons, and also icons mods, ones that remove text and distance numbers and leave only one symbol.

I don't get it...:huh:

Game mode takes time to develop too, e.g. simplified FM for Fw-190 will not be the same as simplified FM for F/A-18 :) Plus you need high level code for linking sim sensors to to "game" ones etc etc... How can they NOT spend time to create game mode for every new module? At the end of the day, thinking in absolute terms like "takes time" is not the way to go. Creating AFM takes time, as does creating SFM, as does making a screenshot. Writing high level code to implement FC3 control scheme to an existing full sim "will take time", but this time will be minuscule compared to somebody making an FC3 plane from scratch. See my Ka-50 psuedocode, the actual code would not be a that much more involved, as essentially one is writing a macro with an odd function like "if radar_altitude > 0: activate x-y-z". Probably easier than making a game mode as well as FMs do not need tweaking for FC3. 1. Wring a macro like code for a FC3 control scheme would unlikely involve the same people who develop AFM or 3d modelling et al, so ED/Razbam/Heatblur would not grind to a halt while this control scheme is being written. 2. It would bring extra revenue and extra customers. Extra revenue would mean extra finance for squashing bugs in current modules and developing new ones (modules and bugs :)). Without FC3 versions, I will NEVER EVER buy some of the modules in my poll simply because I have not got the time (sale or not, these devs will not see my money unfortunately). 1-2 hours of playtime per week is hard to reconcile with learning (and keeping learnt) several high fidelity modules.

You also need to wait for several minutes for INU/GPS to align if I am not mistaken. Shift+L and ctrl+home would be quicker and yet still more immersive than fast forwarding time. Once in the air, yep, outside a few switches, Ka-50 is pretty much Su-25T with rotors. Although... :) Still, you do need to manage the fuel pumps on longer missions (simple high level algo would sort it out quite easily, although of course human operator would be better at fuel managing) and countermeasures have their own programmable panel. And there is no select weapon button, you have switches for "inner" and "outer" pylons (not as obvious as having a "select weapons" in controls options). And Datalink panel needs learning (once again a simple algo would automatically add new targets to Abris screen). And little things like turning on de-icer and dust protection... Individually all procedures are no rocket science, but it all adds up to those infamous 600page manuals :) I think delving into a full sim like Ka-50 (never mind A-10C or F/A-18C) is a psychological thing. You do not know in advance that you only need to "master arm on, laser on, shkval on, select weapon". You have to learn the "which panel does what", "which functions are essential", "which functions could be ignored", "which abbreviation means what" stuff first. So you still have to start learning the full module, read instructions, guides, and then, by about the time you've learnt it, it dawns on you that it is not that hard after all. Until you go away for a while, forget most of it and have to start again :) Having an FC3 mode gets rid of such a fear factor, and makes learning procedures truly quick, while still leaving plenty on the plate to enjoy and providing a stepping stone to a full sim.

Valid point for comparing current scratch built FC3 and full sim modules. Only partially valid if comparing scratch built full sim and subsequent FC3 conversion. FC3 conversion may either loose this functionality altogether or have its algo automatically input TACAN settings for final destination airfield and/or fuel tanker if present in a mission. Then FC3 player would switch to TACAN like he currently switches to ILS. See my F-16/F-18 "FC3fication" post. (https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3454878&postcount=77) Partial functionality would be kept in FC3 and player would be able to react to JTAC for example. See F-16/F-18 "FC3fication" post- some simple waypoint creation would be possible in FC3 version of full sim, but yes, full sim would have a lot more precision and tools here. Simple radios only for FC3. See my Ka-50 and F-16 suggested FC3fication. Sensors in FC3fied module would operate in an identical manner to full sim Impossible in FC3fied module. DM would be identical but if shot up in a FC3fied aircraft, it would either limp back to the base, or you eject. Like in FC3 - Chaff, flares, both. No programs for timing and serial releases. Of the 3 A-10C Campaigns that I have flown, most missions would be possible if A10C was FC3fied. A couple of missions would not be possible - those that involve editing existing waypoints for example. If the said scale has only full sim and FC3 - yes, FC3 would be arcade. If the scale was also to include Ace Combat, Hawx, Strike Fighters etc - FC3 would not be at that end of the spectrum, it would rightly be classed as a simulator. And once again, the thread is not proposing to replace, abandon or ban full sim modules! In fact I said it myself that, with all the costs and difficulties involved, it may not make sense to make exclusive FC3 modules from scratch. FC3fication implies having a full module as its starting base, with all the benefits that research and development of a full sim brings.

No FC3 exclusive modules lets hope :)

Completed the campaign, many thanks again feefifofum! Really enjoyed it and it works perfect in 2.5 (outside of the "Justice" mission 1, still not sure if inability to divert the plane is a broken trigger or mission design). Completed missions 7 and 8 too, thanks for the tips. I've flown pretty much the whole campaign in VR, and it works good in that respect too - apart from missions 4 and the last two (way too many ground units, fps in VR becomes unplayable, on single monitor it's OK).

Falcon 4 was "simulator of the 90's" ;) Thus LOMAC and FC1 were design choices, not constraints of technology. FC1's Su-25 gave birth to AFM, which to me personally was a more important and bigger evolutionary step in flight sims than full clickability originally offered by Falcon (more on AFM below:)). So do I btw! I also think that with the difficulties and costs of making AFM(which in turn often includes fly-by-wire AP - as in F-15C and Su27/33), DM, systems and 3d modelling it does not make sense to stop short of creating a full sim module. So there should not be any more FC3 exclusive modules imho. There may be exceptions - as to nearly any rule - but the general rule should be thus, I completely agree. Yep, many people get so hung up on operating the plane that they forget about actual flying. If somebody thinks that he has learnt the "lowly FC3" F-15C, he may try duelling with some local "Experten" :P (same plane, fuel load, weapons) and learn the hard way that the actual flying is the hard part - managing optimum AoA, speed, climb, trajectory... I've seen people lose 10-0 in "same plane guns only" duels :D

Еще резонное замечание из ветки с опросом: Имхо это не так, но можно обсудить ГС3фикацию подобных многопрофилей, заодно ближе к названию ветки чем Ка-50 :) Общие моменты: Курсор всегда становится SPI если его двигает игрок. Coolie hat или DMS по-прежнему есть в раскладке и им игрок переключает между дисплеями - как и в тренажере. Все сенсоры автоматически привязываются (slave) к курсору/прицельной рамке если ее двигал игрок. Автоматический захват мэверика если игрок сделал заxват цели в TGP/на радаре. (чтоб игроку ГС3 не надо было захватывать цель в TGP, делать SPI, включать slave, переключатся на дисплей мэверика, делать подтвержадющий захват им и лишь потом стрелять. Тут- захват TGP и выстрел) 1. Запуск- Shift+L, Ctrl+home как в примере Ка-50 2. Базовая автоматизация процедур от которых можно полностью освободить ГС3шника. если радио_высота >0: Master arm on, laser arm on, maverick boot up, TGP boot up G-limiter переключать автоматом в зависимости от веса самолета CBU cluster bomb - поставить высоту раскрытия 700ft 3. Воздух-воздух: Процедуры идентичны стандарту ГС3 (range, антенна верх/вниз лево/право; TWS/RWS; пульс (прибиж/удаляущихся целей); BVR, Vertical Scan и Helmet Sight mode. Остальные можно для ГС3 версии опустить. 4. Воздух-земля: Те же клавиши что и в В-В режиме здесь управляют range,snowplow, GM (стационарные цели), GMT(подвиж цели), Norm to DBS (ширина луча или разрешение картинки радара). В принципе это все те же "навел курсор, захватил цель, нажал пуск" :) 5. TGP: Опять те же клавиши что и в В-В. Высокоуровневой функцией соединить norm and wide уровни зума с их отдельными постепенными зумами. В ГС3 бысть будет один постепенный зум который идет от минимума wide до максимума norm. TV and White hot режимы, Black hot недоступен ГС3. Активировать N/M автоматом при включении TGP. 6. Карта/TAD Опять те же клавиши что и В-В режим. Функциональность ограничить до создания новых ППМ, выбора существующих ППМ (которые тогда автоматом становятся SPI). Автоматом создавать новые ППМ при получении координат от JTAC. если JTAC послание на экране игрока & TAD выбран SOI & игрок нажимает клавишу "Х": ввести координаты JTAC в CDU и показать ППМ на карте. 7. Ловушки: Как в ГС3, никаких хаток CMS и программированных выбросов

I do not see the problem personally. Yes, FC3 F16 (F/A-18C) would be more complex than FC3 F15 by definition, but their FC3 iterations would still be considerably easier to pick up and come back to than the the full sim versions - which is the whole point of this thread. The F-16C (F/A-18C) FC3fication algo :) could run something like this: (a) Start up - Shift+L, Ctrl+home similar to my Ka-50 example (b) Basic automation (FC3 player completely spared)- all on take off: Master arm, laser arm, maverick boot up, TGP boot up G-limiter auto set depending on current plane weight CBU cluster bomb - set height to 700ft 1. Air to air modes/procedures : Same as current FC3 craft (range, antenna up/down left/right; TWS/RWS; pulse (for hot/cold air targets)); BVR, Vertical Scan and Helmet Sight modes (the others may be omitted). 2. Air to Ground Radar: same buttons that control a2a radar above would control range,snowplow, GM (stationary targets), GMT(moving targets), Norm to DBS (beam width=radar picture resolution). At its most basic it's "slew the target reticle, lock the target, fire" - just like a2a:) 3. TGP: Once again, controlled by the same keys as a2a stuff. Replace norm and wide discrete zoom levels + continuous zoom with continuous zoom only throughout the range. %replace here means augment with high level function like in Ka-50 example TV and White hot modes only, leave out Black hot. Activate N/M automatically on start of TGP. At its most basic it's "slew the target reticle, lock the target, fire" again. 4.Moving map: same keys as a2a stuff Functionality limited to creating new waypoints, selecting existing waypoints (automatically becoming SPI) and autocreation of waypoints from JTAC transmissions (e.g. if JTAC transmission is shown on screen & TAD is SOI & player presses key "X": automatically input the coords into CDU and display this point on the moving map) 5. Countermeasures: Same as FC3, no complex programs, one button for chaff, one for flares and one for both. General points: The cursor always becomes SPI if moved. Still have Coolie hat/DMS to switch between each screen (sensor of interest SOI). Maybe all sensors could always be slaved to the reticle on currently selected screen if it (the reticle) is moved. Automatically activate maverick lock if locked on target on TGP or radar. (to avoid having to do the "TGP>lock>select as SPI>slave all>switch to Mav display>confirm lock> fire" routine, here it would be "TGP>lock>fire"). I do not see how people who wanted a fully clickable F/A-18 "loose their money" if others get a cheaper but also more simplified F/A-18. And, there are two ways of profiting: via separate FC3 module OR via "FC3 mode" replacing current "game mode" in full sim modules. (need to know actual sales numbers here, so the sale strategy is not up to us). I'd be happy with either as, the way it is at the moment, I will never buy some of the modules in my list not because of the price, but because I don't have the time. Obviously, if I am interested in FC3 part of the full sim module only, I would more likely to pick up that full sim+FC3 bundle during sale, if I am interested in the full sim as well, I'd be more happy with the full price. Also, some FC3 modules like the F-16 and F/A-18 should cost more than the 15$ we currently pay for FC3 Su-33/F-15C as the former are more complex with more sensors (a2g radar, TGP) and weapons (HARMs, mavericks, guided bombs etc).

We've discussed this exact issue in the general FC3 topic https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3450169#post3450169, here are some quotes to save me retyping the answers:

That's cool guys, if nothing else it goes to show that even if a cheaper FC3 F-14 was available, there would still be plenty of hardcore market left for the full sim clickable version. Passion's good