metzger

I think OP has a point, all above suggested workarounds which are not good in every case. As for the difficult level, I also find default campaigns a bit more difficult than they should be as a defaults. Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

I have also noticed the F-5 is the most difficult aircraft to spot in dcs. Ive been doing many dogfights with Sabre and Mig15 which are smaller, also against 21 all of then easier to see and track than the F-5 in mid/close ranges. Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Hit "pause" or "esc" do your stuff, come back and continue. As for the repeating because you are shot down - part of the fun on a combat flight sim as DCS is to pre-brief, plan and familiarize carefully with the mission flow and objectives, then execute your preparation from start-up to shut-down. This is where DCS focuses and this is why there is no option to save, it is not intended to be used this way. If you have to repeat the same part all over again until you learn the "pattern" and pass it aka Super Mario level, then DCS is not the correct title for you or you have to improve your skill before jumping on that mission/campaign. Just my 2 cents.

Why you bring f-16 here ? From what I have researched, the g-suite gave about 1G advantage for the Sabres and combining that the Sabre pilots was much more trained to sustain high G loads than the majority of MiG pilosts(mostly koreans and chinese) and on top of that, the lack of hidraulics made pulling the stick for high G very very difficult, Migs could not outmanuever the Sabres, therefore they used their climb and ceiling advantage in most of the fights. There were also other limitations, the cockpit was very bad ergonomics and was not comfortable at all, they could not seat for long, communication was bad due to language issues and just see how complex is to change frequency in the MiG while Sabre has preset channels. The heating was also bad and the aircraft was not very reliable. Sabres was outnumbered in 3-4 to 1 in most engagements as sabre squadrons were limited while MiGs were in high numbers in China but the Pilot training, the above limitations of the MiGs and the more precise sight made most of the fights to be won by the Sabres. Honchos were rare and came a bit later in the war, when it was obvious that Korean and Chinese pilots were not capable to challenge American Pilots.

That would be great!

From what I know one had to be body builder to pull G with the MiG and that combined with the lack of g suite they could not outmaneuver the sabres even tho it was technically possible. Also the majority of the pilots were koreans with poor training, honchos were rare. UN had the air superiority all the time and while Migs were a challenge they was not capable to change that. Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Like iRacing is doing, pay for modules and for the service. But they did really good work there with the MP system. ED can do MP dynamic missions and host different theaters and make them subscription based, it would probably be good but I am sure ED knows how to make money from their business. I just hope someday we will have better bug fix policy and communication as of now, this is the most disapointing aspect of DCS.

It is hard to satisfy all potential customers. I'd say double the price of the modules but clear the bugs in both core engine and modules themselves. But some people will not like paying more. So may be this is the best balance between price and quality they manage to achieve so far.

The issues I have listed never worked since it release. And they know how they work as they are in the training missions. INS bombing and ccrp release cue are covered in the INS bombing training mission, but the feature was never implemented to a working state. The course on target feature is covered in the HSI/Navigation mission, never worked. INS alignment was explained in the INS training mission, it was never implemented as described. You can allign INS in the air while flying or correct it with a simple INS update push without any reference. All this was reported in the beginning and we were told "It is still in beta and those features are still not implemented" well, here we are, 4 years later, no beta, but those are still not implemented. I don't care about the M2K anymore so if they do implement it eventually, for me it was never working as promised. EDIT: Speaking about the MIrage earlier, it is unfortunate that Razbam become a bad example here, I am sure they can do good modules, it is the approach that is wrong imho.

M2K... released 2015, INS bombing -> doesn't work, CCRP release cue -> doesnt work, requried course on target -> doesn't work, INS allignment -> doesn't work as intended, and many other bugs... But we have got a new Pilot body. And somehow it went out of beta so I guess considered finished. I see Harrier going the same direction and this is why this thread exist. This approach should be avoided.

I own all modules and L39 is one of the few I fly quite often more often than many real combat ones. In fact irl L39ZA saw more real combat than the Viggen. It is really fun aircraft to fly and achieving success with it is really satisfactory. Aside the fun, becoming proficient with the low performance aircraft with no systems to help you, will surely improve your airmanship piloting skills or bombing accuracy. Sure you don't necessarily have to use a trainer, go jump in the hornet and do your stuff but this doesn't mean the light attack or trainer is not a combat aircraft and it's not fun. Someone might actually simulate a combat training procedures utilizing the multicrew (sitting in the back with VR in a dogfight is quite immersive and fun). Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

If it was so ridiculous, would it be successful for already 25 years ? Obviously customers are ok with that. And what do you think will happen with DCS if everyone thinks that paying for a nich simulator is ridiculous and it should be maintained for free ? If there is no business case for ED to do it, what do you think will happen ? Someone will do it just to satisfy people who thinks everything should be given to them for free because 8 years ago they paid for a module ? Do you work for free ? Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Of course it is not the same analogy but it is close enough. Fifa 18 is actively for sale for the same price until the next one is released. BS2 will not be for sale once BS3 is released, the difference is that you have significantly longer life time for the shark in compared to the fifa. You have to also consider the difference in the niche market as a helicopter within a combat flight sim and a Fifa soccer game - more potential sales will decrease the price. So fifa is much more overpriced in this regard, especially knowing that you will pay 70 bucks and after 1 year it will be obsolete, MP servers will be empty and you will have to pay another 70 for the new one, while BS2 you could actively use for 10 years. Now you can still have the same option as fifa - Buy the new BS3 with new graphics to use in DCS 2.5 and above, or keep using the old version 1.5 without paying more but with empty servers etc. EDIT: I do have most of the fifa's and they feel very much the same with minor changes, If I underline the amount of work required for those changes, I can say the same that you underline the amount of work required for the complete 3d model and textures update. We are not speaking about jsut fixing the buttons lights, this is easy - download the devrim cockpit, I am sure ED can fix that for free, we talk about complete renovation of the cockpit 3d mesh. When talking about what the update should be, night capabilities etc is pointless to speak as this would be different frame and they stated 1000 times they wont do different frame. What can be added is some new missions,skins, better INS simulation and similar stuff. They can only do a graphical update and charge a bit less then a full module or any similar approach. I am sure ED will make the correct decision, we are about to see what soon enough.

Take fifa for example. Every year they release "new" Fifa for full price around $70-$80. It mostly feels the same with minor tweaks, graphics from year to year is very slightly improved, they update licenses and stuff, pretty much the same graphics and gameplay engines with minor tweaks, doesn't feel at all as completely new game more like a small updates. Now if you take fifa for 10 years from fifa 2009 to fifa 2019, there is already a bit bigger difference but you have paid approx. $800 to play pretty much the same fifa for 10 years. For the shark you paid $50-$60, and when a major update is asked to be payed(it can be taken as a complete new BS3 following BS2, the same way fifa19 follows fifa18) you start to complain ?! And have in mind that until a few months back, BS2 was sold for $39 when not on sale, which means many people payed $40 bucks for 10 years of support and gameplay. Sorry but I think most of you doesn't deserve DCS to exist.

+1

I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. It is fine that with time and the always evolving model of DCS will never feel completely finished and calling something beta or EA is very subjective and abstract. But there should be also some limitations to this. Razbam is a good example where M2K still has 3 years old bugs or not implemeted features which are in the training missions even. At the same time they have harrier in even worst state and now mig-19. While they state it is different teams involved, this is not true as obviously Zeus is coding them all. I believe all major features and bugs should be fixed in the current modules before a new project is started and this is fair to be asked for. From ED/Belsimtek side, there are countless of bugs which also are there for years and not payed attention for, I don't want to go for examples now, but checking each modul forum sections will show it. While all the resources are focused on the Hornet for quite long time already and nothing else has been touched pretty much. While I do accept their model, I believe they can do a bit better with handling bugs and EA states. And pay more attention to forum bug reports, give more information when something is expected to be fixed or checked. As now many reported bugs in multiple threads are just ignored and this is a bit frustrating.

It is not broken I fly it everyday and it works as per manual as much as any other module, in fact is much less broken than many modules especially some 3rd parties. Lights bug is annoying but devrim mod fixes it to some degree. May be ED should fix the light bug and leave the rest as it is for who is not willing to pay. For the other people, release a completely overhauled BS3 for sale. In addition to graphics may be some better simulation of INS and electrical systems and some other currently not simulated systems might justify the cost for a new module, but I would be happy with a graphical only update as well. Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Very good points, even tho I haven't even wathed the video ;) Small correction to one of your points :) "In the forward position, the INU correction is done through the Shkval, and in the rear position, it's done through flying over a known reference point. This switch is only used in conjunction with the INU alignment buttons on the PVI-800." The switch can be very important and it is not used only in conjuction with the alignment buttons. You can create mark points: 1. switch up, pvi to edit, select nav tgt, select the nav tgt number, press shkval uncage button and the coordinates where the shkval is looking are recorded into pvi as the selected nav tgt number. 2. If the switch is down, the current aircraft coordinates are recorded.

Absolutely. I already stated earlier, no company can maintain a software up to date forever for free. Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Not 50 feet man, in Caucasus map, the majority are 50 meters, which is 150 feet :) There are some big trees in Caucasus region but this seems a bit too much and a bit too many of them :)

Copy. Totally understand your point and agree that people start talking all kind of crap. Thanks for the input :) Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Why don't you just fly mig or su ? Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Shark needs more than just a minor texture update like ww2 birds. Cockpits need lots of improvement in the 3d model itself which is lacking details compensated with textures now. So I rather pay for a big overhaul than having minor update for Free. As we probably wont get a new update for it in the near future, so better take more now. Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

I don't understand how the missile can track the chaff if radar on stt mode stays with the target ? Chaff are not connected to the aircraft and will remain in space somewhere behind fairly quickly so they wont be illuminated in such case. What can chaff reflect to fool the missile, may be I am missing something ? Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

You have to understand that ED are not obligated to keep the modules be it KA-50 or any other with up to date graphics forever anyhow. It's all up to them to decide if they are willing to do it and if it will be free or not. They have the right to decide to make it payed or make it for free. They can also easily say use it in 1.5 if you wish the lights to work or buy BS3 if you wish a nice graphic update for 2.5. Ka-52, r73 bla bla... they stated thousands of times that we have a specific Ka-50 version and this is how it is IRL and this is how it will be in DCS. for the currently not modeled systems which are actually in the irl version, would be good to have them included as well as better simulated INS with drift and proper allignment.