Katmandu

A fair point! Of course the economic details need to be worked out by people with access to sale numbers of FC3/FC3 standalone planes/Full sim modules. There are always negative strategic effects ,but it is possible to negate them. Plus there are positive strategic effects too (people buying full Hornet module after positive FC3 Hornet experince; initially they may have been put off buy the difficulty/time drain but now understand the basic mechanics and want more). The potential solutions may be along the following lines:

The conversation is hypothetical at the moment, with the developer also (it seems to me) taking a hypothetical stance I.e. the project is potentially possible, but ...implementation details. The potential implementation may be interesting to discuss - hypothetically of course :) With regards to "FC3 philosophy" - it is my opinion of course, but it is not about having keyboard shortcuts instead of clicky buttons. It is about having shallower learning curve and less overall complexity than full sim.

Thank you for your answer! "Compiling" and also disabling (some) functionality would be the way for FC3, the ultimate control and thus ultimate performance should rightly belong to the full simulator mode. For example, in full sim mode, one may be able to control radar antenna up/down, left/right and also fine tune the width of the beam by selecting how many bars to scan. In FC3 mode, the player would also have the up/down right/left controls but have (e.g.) only two options for beam width. TCS video would have manual control in full sim, but be always autoslaved to radar in FC3. Full sim mode would have soft lock mode, but FC3 would only have TWS/RWS and hard lock... I have not flown/studied the F-14 just yet (waiting patiently for your module :)) so can not go into every specific detail, but the general idea - compile (like you've said) and also remove (i.e. make inaccessible) the "less necessary functions". JESTER AI is of course something that I do not know, so if the above was logical for "downscaling" a full sim single seater, it may not apply to JESTER. To continue this hypothetical "downscaling into FC3" conversation, imho keeping some partial cockpit clickability (is there such a word?)) is actually desirable in FC3 module. Memorising keyboard shortcuts (especially for less often used functions such as TV/NORM switch in F-14, or fuel quantity in F-15, or salvo mode selector switch in Su-25 ) should be optional as it is much easier to click that labelled selector in the pit than remembering to press "Ctrl+Alt+D" or something. Anyways, the main feature of FC3 is Shift+L to turn on avionics and Ctrl/Alt+Home for left/right engines :D Joking aside, Win+Home autostart takes several long minutes and does go against FC philosophy quite a bit, not many new players would be willing to put up with it.

Servers make their own rules on plane sets. No, but I know what you mean. I've said similar stuff myself to a guy who wanted FC3 level Ka-50 :P : https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1847963&postcount=12 Years later I see that was a bit wishful thinking on my part (did manage to convince him though). Link? Although Wags' famous signature "everything is subject to change" gives us hope anyway :) Also, what about replacing "game" modes? Surely you'd agree that "FC3 mode" for F/A-18 would better than the existing "Ka-50 game" or "A-10C game" (have you tried them?)? ============== So far the arguments and counters are roughly thus: 1. Harms multiplayer - (no, servers make their own rules. You do not see "A-10C game mode" farming kills- because they are not allowed by servers(?) ) 2. Harms development of full sim stuff -( no, it is *cheap'n'simple* high level coding and brings extra revenue and customers) 3. Against philosophy - (no, FC3 was the cornerstone of DCS and continues to be enriched) 4. Full sim is near as easy as FC3 anyways if you use autostart - (that's a no, first hand experience coming back to DCS/BMS after long breaks)

You suspect, but you assert and impose your personal viewpoint on the whole community. FC3 is part of DCS, no less than any other module, it has its philosophy, its community, history and future (that MiG-29 AFM:pilotfly:). No need to patronise FC3 fans by telling them "you've got enough already to progress to the right thing". Progression to full modules is not a given. I've played FC3, I also enjoyed A-10C, Falcon BMS and Ka-50... and still like flying in FC3:) I do not want to learn the systems in M-2000 or the Viggen, but I'd like to fly them nonetheless. I intend to own all 10 of the modules listed in my poll and I know that there is no chance that I'd be able to remember the procedures for all of them. Yet I would like to keep them flyable - just the way I can hop into Su-25 and F-15 at this moment (A-10A not so much as it lacks the targeting pod). So FC3 and "full sim" are not at odds. Plus, developing FC3 modules from full sim ones would bring additional revenue into the sim, not the other way round. It's cheap compared to developing an FC3 or a full module from scratch and it would bring extra customers and revenue.

Like the Flaming Cliffs 3 :doh: :megalol:

The hope is that adding FC3 mode is cheap and will attract aditional fans into DCS as well as convert some of those who sit on the fence with regards to particular modules. So "invested effort" should be nearly the same as for making the module in the first place, but additional revenue for the creators and expanding fan base should make it simbiotic for everybody (including the people who do not care for FC3). The whloe point of the thread was to use "duplicates" of the existing and announced modules :)Not pie in the sky "which plane would you like in FC3?" kinda poll. FC3 planes take a massive amount of effort to make - AFM, 3d model, cockpit, systems, weapons- and the suggestion here is to re-use the already created fully clickable modules. Just like ED did themselves with "game" modes in the fully clickable Ka-50 and A-10C, but with FC3 replacing "game".

Я включил только те которые уже вышли или заявлены. Ф-35 пока вроде не было в анонсах или я пропустил?

The kind of people this poll is aimed at: or etc :)

"None" is the answer for the "elitists" whom I've discussed in the OP. If you feel that FC3 is "War Thunder" and that FC3 is surplus to requirements - that is fine, but the premise of the FC3 forum's very existence is that there are other people who value it for what it is. I mean, seriously? Since when did WT have AFM, radar pulse repetition freq/doppler effects and the like? Not to mention huge maps and single player/coop campaigns. We have thousands of views in the mods section in threads that discuss making models of e.g.F/A-18, Su-30, Pakfa, Tornado, F-16 - all with existing FMs from the current FC3 craft, most even keep the default F15/Su27 cockpit... Plus, with only 10 slots max for the votes I ran out of slots before I could mention A-10C, Mig-15, Sabre, Gazelle, etc. This poll is not about making any steps - forward or backward. Clickable modules will continue to exist, as will the FC3 ones. Ka-50 was a definite step forward in simulation, and the evolution is undeniable. But I am not proposing to replace the current Ka-50 fully clickable version with an FC3 one. What I am proposing is to replace the "Ka-50 game" arcade part (with 360deg all seeing "radar" and simplified flight physics) of the Ka-50 module with an FC3 one. Same with A-10C, same with the upcoming F/A-18. And same with the other full sim modules that do not have "game" modes right now. You do not need to make it twice, FC3 mode keeps the AFM and radar/shkval/Lightning pod implementation, it keeps all the physics and simplifies only some of the avionics.

Cоздал опросник тут, заходим и голосуем (ED & Co выберут все равно "Путина"... но вдруг нет :)) Какие из настоящих и предстоящих тренажер-модулей хотели бы вы увидеть в ГС3: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3444867#post3444867

Probad, lets be progood :) The F14 thread https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3444857#post3444857 was aimed at F-14 devs/crowd only, this is a general FC3 discussion.

I've decided that this thread should also have an outlet in the FC3 forum, come on in for a chat and a vote :) : https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=205882

First things first, this topic is only for those who enjoy FC3, not for the "elitists" who call FC3 "arcade", "pointless now that there are clickable modules" and other such lark. If you like the philosophy behind FC3 (sort of IL2 for modern air combat), which of the current and upcoming modules would you like to see get an FC3 version? For example, do you want to fly Ka-50, but do not want to spend the time necessary to learn its systems? Or, have you learnt the Ka-50 2years ago, but forgotten everything and and can't make yourself start all over again? Vote here to have Ka-50 have a Su-25T like implementation and make it into "like riding a bicycle" forget-proof version. Same hardcore physics and weapons, just simplified procedures (FC3 level). N.B. I do hugely enjoy both the fully clickable modules and the FC3 craft. One thing I personally would like changed in DCS is the replacement of the "game" parts of a fully clickable module (like "Ka-50 game" or "A-10C game" with FC3 counterparts). For one, it would make easier to come back to a DCS module after being away from it for a while, when relearning its systems may not be as appealing as the first time round. But there are lots of reasons for FC3's existence of course, summed up by one RL Airbus pilot as "FC3/IL2 is for times when I'd like to fly and not work):) The economics are important of course, but I'd be happy to buy my "full fat" modules with an included FC3 version, or a standalone FC3 plane. EDIT: An example algorithm on how to condense a full sim module to FC3 (pseudocode for FC3ing the full sim Ka-50): https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3448774&postcount=40 and (EDIT_3) similar thing for a more complex multi function jet like F/A-18C or F-16C https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3454878&postcount=77 EDIT2: Some common concerns and possible answers: Concern 1: Answer: Concern 2: Answer: Concern 3: Answer:

Wilco! Thanks again.

OK, thanks for the answers! I don't want another DCS install so I'll wait for the DCS e-shop sale.

I'm thinking about getting the Harrier in the ongoing Steam sale, but my main DCS install is standalone. Will i be able to activate steam module on my standalone? Sorry if this is a common question, but there were some recent changes with activation, offline use, keyless modules etc etc so I am not sure about the current status quo.

A-10C Sturmovik (A-10C naturally enough) and Eye for an Eye (F-15) work well right now.

Which variant and do you have a linke for that info? Is Harrier going to get a radar?

В стиме у меня ДКСовского ничего нет, а с защитой вроде перемены какие-то происходят. То 3 дня было, теперь бесконечная активация. Не знаю имеет это отношение к активации ключей, поэтому спросил. Плюс - если нельзя стим ключ активировать здесь - то будет ли распродажа дублирована в магазине ДКС.

Распродажа на Стиме будет дублироваться здесь? Или можно там модуль купить и тут активировать? Подумываю Харриер прикупить

Не надо буквоEDствовать Говорим про тяжелые модули синих и красных. Миг-15 и Сабля туда же. "Сравнивать продажи кликабельных модулей "синих" просто есть с чем.

Оу йес бейби?

Ми-8 и Хью :)

Мне показалось или Чиж как-то говорил что Горячие Скалы - самый прибыльный модуль ДЦС?