shadepiece

Right I don't mean to imply that changing the range on the gunsight changes the convergence range, only that you could have a lower convergence range, and still have it work with the gunsight. However, that being said, I do not see myself using the gyro all that much due to the fact that I'm used to a static gunsight, which I think will be more effective for me.

This seems to be consistently what I hear about the damage model in DCS. I don't remember exactly where I read it, but it was explained to me that originally the damage model was made to be a type of point system. This was mostly due to the fact that DCS is primarily a modern aircraft simulator where the majority of the damage is done via missiles and in one lump sum of aircraft destroying explosion! However, that would explain why it was not as in depth as say, CloD. I think this is being reworked already, but it be nice if wags brought up some of these WWII related concerns, and address him in the update videos. I honestly believe that this will be updated, but it's something currently diswaying many a prop head. Edit: Sobek, this is what I thought, but I think the confusion comes in the way that the AI damage model seems to not be reactive to any damage. Now that has been explained to me as the AI is programed to be able to fly their planes as energy efficient as possible regardless of the damage. So the damage is done, but it's not apparent for the player's point of view.

Dooom thank you very much for your reply! This is the sort of thing I, and many other people are looking for. A little convincing goes a long way. I am extremely tempted to get one of the aircraft, but honestly I'm too torn haha! I am by nature a huge mustang fan. A little boys dream right there however, over time I've tended to realize that the German fighters clearly fit my preferred flight style. I was tempted to drop a lot during the previous flash sale on the ED's website, but I am very much bound to Steam. Since steam keys work with the standalone, but not the other way around I have made up my mind I'll buy on the steam store for now. Sobek respectfully I disagree completely. As I said sources have been provided that changing the convergence was something that was in some way commonplace. To the extent that I, and many other think should be added. As I said I am thinking of a few persets to be determined, and allowed to be switched for preference. There were, if I have understood correctly, many possible adjustments that could be made for the P-51D's convergence range. I do NOT want, as you say a slider. I am not asking for some unreasonable convergence settings. Even the K-14 gunsight can be ranged all the way down to 600ft. Not to mention that I have no way of understanding how my personal preference in convergence affects you in any way. You could keep yours where it is, and I could change mine, and that would be fine for both of us. I cannot understand how, as I have seen some put it, a "game-breaking" feature. So again, as I've said before, it would, without a doubt, be historically accurate, and what I find combat effective is no doubt different than what you might find is. Shooter preference is an important part of being combat effective. Also, my approach to this matter is anything but simplistic. I understand that gun convergence is determined by many factors, and variables, and as much as I'd absolutely love to experiment and find the exact settings that would work best for me, I do not expect others to do the same amount of painstaking experimentation, which is why I would prefer a choice of a few presets over a slider.

So I feel like the argument has been made proving that pilots could alter their convergences to different preset during the war. If you want those sources you can talk to Solty (hopefully he doesn't mind the name drop). If you can alter the convergence in the .lua files I don't think it would be to much to ask for a much simpler section in the mission editor to change your convergence. As for the damage model the questions I have mostly revolve around the AI damage model. Why is it that some people believe that the DM for AI planes is bad. From the sounds of things the AI are unphased by damage until it it critical enough to destroy the aircraft outright. Even heard some peoples opinion the the DM acts much like a health bar being depleted on certain modules in the aircraft. I don't think that view is correct, but I am wondering how the game's engine produces projectiles, and track their effect on other aircraft. I would love some explanation on how this is computed. Do things like gravity, velocity, angle of impact have a big influence on the effectiveness on the damage output.

Hello all, This is my first post here on these forums, and I hope to bring a few points to the table for discussion. Many of these points have been covered before, but none of those threads seem to be active anymore, and I'd like to have a new discussion given that we are on the verge of 1.5. Let me start by saying that my experience in flight sims might be somewhat less extensive than some of you, but it has been a hobby of mine since I was very little. My Dad bought me Jane's '97 back in the day, soon followed by Jane's WWII Fighters. However, it wasn't until recently that I began to get back in to sims, and I started again more recently getting back into them with a Logitech Extreme 3D Pro. I have a set of MFG Crosswinds on order, and just this week I received my Track IR 5. Also, planning on upgrading to a TM Warthog HOTAS in the coming weeks. I tell you this to ensure you understand that I am serious about this hobby, and I'm not inexperienced in these matters. The discussion I want to have is one of accessibility to DCS from someone who is interested solely in the WWII aircraft. I have logged some flight time in the TF-51, albeit mostly just taking off and landing, but I have not yet baught any of the DCS modules. Some of the reasons I have for not doing so are, price barrier to entry, no gun convergence adjustability, lack of understanding for the damage model, few aircraft/scenarios possible to experience in DCS World, and finally a very small player base for WWII DCS servers. This list of things are what has kept me from buying into DCS so far, and I suspect it is also possible why many other sim pilots have not taken the dive. My goal is to have a discussion on some of these you, in a mature, and civilized manner, and see if we could boil down these points, and possibly make DCS look more inviting to the more average sim flyer. My thoughts on the above mentioned points, -Price is not an issue if one waits for a sale,or is more informed about what exactly they receive with the purchase, and what can be done in game. -Gun convergence is a big issue to me. I prefer to get in very, very close to fire, and therefore I like my convergence much shorter than some. I know this has been covered before, but I'd like to put my two cents in, and say that this is something that definitely turns me off of DCS, and I think the easiest, and most acceptable remedy would be to add multiple, historically correct, presents to choose in the mission Editor. -The damage model is something of a mystery to someone who has not played in DCS World, and would like some general clarification, and I think many others that are on the fence would as well. -Obviously this will come in time. This is an issue that i believe will ve solved once the Spit and Thunderbolt are out. However, some other period aircraft that are flyable by AI would be a great addition. -The lack of player base is what we are here to hopefully solve by additional information, and possibly some slight coaxing. These are my basic points, and I will elaborate on any one of them should it be desired. I hope, not only for myself, but for many people on the fence about getting into DCS, we can make the WWII portion of DCS more appealing. Thank you for your time. And feedback. -shadepiece