SparxOne

@Mover Hey there boss, is there a way that the FLCS will g-limit the maneouvers of the aircraft when those weapons/pods are strapped on ? Say if aircraft has tanks on, will the FLCS automatically g-limit the aircraft to 6.5G's ? Or is it a pilots responsability to not go over that limit ? I'm asking because in a simulator we of coarse do not have the true feeling of G's and therefore very easy to go over any kind of G's without noticing it physically, so a pretty tedious thing to watch out for in a stressful situation

My expectations are met, it looks beautiful and this screenshot was taken not later than 3 minutes after takeoff. Good job ED, i'm really glad and happy to have this upgrade !

Nothing against you here, but Gayjin itself is no reference at all in simulating real things, mentioning them doesn't even need to be done, they are on a complete different league.

I don't entirely agree with you here, this kind of talk will in any case boil down to personnal experience and personnal opinion. Either way, as much as "pride" is probably a big part of the way people play games, i still personnaly believe that a system forcing a punishment on the player for dying does indeed force the player into playing differently if he's into playing the game "properly" and wanting to actually succeed and improve. The impact a player has in any game really depends on the involvement he's putting into that said game, someone playing a game like EFT with such a punishable system will have to adapt or he simply won't improve. Plus, you seem to focus on the as quoted "death/respawn" timer accomplishing nothing but making the game a nuisance, if you're referencing to the 20 mins timer that was previously stated on EFT, well unless you've played the game and know exactly what it is about and how it works, trust me, it isn't a nuisance since that timer only applies to a unimportant part of the game, your main progression is not impacted at all by that timer. Your main progression has no timer what so ever if you die/respawn. My point to be clear, if DCS had a somewhat punishable system for death, don't you think people would fly differently on most servers ? Don't you honestly think people would think twice before flying "braindead" into a sam infested area ? Or into a highly disadvantaged air to air battle ? Funny because i've also been kinda pessimistic in another thread about the exact same subject, i was more leaning towards an end of 2022 rather Yet i was told otherwise by Fri13 telling me that the ground vehicles DM would be worked on after the WWII stuff... But i still don't believe that and am on the same info as you, ground DM is something that will be worked on AFTER it is implemented to modern aircrafts So quite a way to go before we get to see anything

Not that it's very important i'll admit, but i had to correct you here haha As a long term EFT player, i can tell you that you do not have a 20 minutes penalty when you die with your main character that blocks you from playing another match/raid/game. You have your main character and the SCAV character The main character is the one with whom you'll do your quest and have the main progression of the game of coarse. I'm not gonna go into more details because too long and we're on DCS forums, so who cares about EFT lol. SCAV character is the one that has a cool down timer of 20 minutes if you die with it. But the SCAV character is very different from the main character and is considered a bonus "free" character you get to use every 20 minutes to bring back loot, once again, not gonna go deeper into details as not relevant to DCS forums... But if there is one thing that i could link to DCS as a feature that could potentially make it even better, it would certainly be the risk of death, just like in EFT. That's to me probably the feature that makes the game stand out the most, the stress and adrenaline you get when entering a gunfight knowing very well that death would mean loosing that hard earned gear you have on yourself and therefore starting either from scratch or picking a spare one you have in your stash (But of coarse not infinite). It makes the fights much more challenging and decision making very important ! Do i wanna risk my gear and fight ? Or should i flee and stay safe to fight another day ? The whole aspect of being punished for dying can of coarse be very frustrating in certain situations, yet it pushes you to have a certain play style and mindset if you're willing to keep playing the game, therefore anyone coming to troll or play carelessly will simply loose interest very fast because of how fast they'll hit the bottom of the pit and be rendered kinda useless facing someone who did take it serious enough.

Thanks a lot for the cool explanations ! Makes it much clearer to me Makes me feel reassured knowing it will still work properly without a special set of controls I was indeed confused with the collective and that twist grip thinking it was called the cyclic I understand it all better now Will check that manual out if deeper questions come to my mind or if i'm feeling like doing some more reading

Back on topic for an actual question regarding a concern i have. Knowing that helicopters have an added control to fly the heli, not sure how it's called, maybe the cyclic or something linked to the power lever or so. I've always flown planes and having a joystick i have all the axis necessary to fly them. The roll axis, the pitch axis, the yaw axis and the thrust. So if i were to compare the helicopter axis to the plane, you would have all the above stated but the added cyclic if i'm not mistaken. No joystick unless specificaly buying one for simulating a helicopter has that remaining axis needed. So my question is, how would i come about properly flying any chopper in DCS while missing that axis on my joystick ? How do people deal with this issue ? I'd be very curious to know how it is first of all handled by the sim (DCS) and second how players use it when they have no proper hardware representing it ? If i can give an exemple that is modeled in a way that really doesn't make it feel any problematic at all, it would be the way helicopters fly and are handled in Arma game, of coarse the game is far from being called a heli simulator, but nonetheless it is the only game i've played that represented well enough to me the feel of a heli without having proper hardware to use all axis properly. I hope you guys understand my concern and know what i'm talking about

This makes me laugh, not in the sense that you're wrong, i'm totally with you on this matter, but it makes me laugh thinking of the airquake guys finding the most creative excuses to allow those loadouts to be perceived as realistic -> Taking off in their F-18's loaded with 10 Amrams and 2 Sidewinders for a combat sortie. When i fly on multiplayer server and see those kind of planes take off, i become sad and feel like i'm playing Ace Combat, while they are imagining themselves as Top Guns raking as many kills per sortie...

Now that you mention this it reminds me of a little subtle thing, havn't done any research on this so can't be 100% sure, but, from what i vaguely remember, that was meant only for the WWII ground vehicles as that seamed to be a pretty much logical step to have a complete experience in the WWII aspect of the game. So i believe that their plan was to develop the damage model for WWII planes and ground vehicles than modern aircrafts and lastly modern (everything after WWII) ground vehciles. If i'm right on this, it would mean that my initial statement still stands, we are on a long wait before it happens.

Talking about the sniper pod, i remember that thing being part of a priority feature list we had to vote for at some point for the future dev of the F-16. When the "results" of that poll came out, it was written that the sniper pod was a priority as from the players. Never heard a thing about it since than, so my question is, is it still a thing to come up one day ? Does ED still plan on creating it for the 16 sooner or later ?

Anyone waiting for the ground vehicles damage model to be done is on a long wait until it happens. From what i remember hearing, they are only just implementing the beginning of it to WWII airplanes, so that is still very much a WIP feature. And from what i heard, their plan is to fully implement it to WWII stuff than only move to modern airplanes and probably helicopters than lastly ground stuff... So yeah, if i were to guesstimate it, i'd be pretty confident to say the ground damage model ain't coming before AT LEAST end of 2022 and i feel i'd still be very optimistic with that

Waow ! They really look good ! Anyway i could have them in their original format please ? I'd love to keep these in a folder on my PC

Those are features i actually can't wait to see coming up ! The full capability that the JHMCS brings in the 16 ! Nothing like being able to see or designate your targets via the helmet. Something close to what the A-10 currently has would be insane, but i think i've read somewhere that won't happen as the A-10 features are much more advanced than the 16 they are modelling here

Hey, read that on the Roadmap (Unofficial) thread, Any idea what he means by starting with "The Viper" ? Than continuing to say F-4 news ? I'm confused I started asking myself, is there something from the Viper that's called F-4 that i don't know about ? Edit : Damn i might be stupid, was he mentioning someone in Discord called "The Viper" ? Probably that...

Yeah no doubt about that, was really just mentioning it and the fact that i was disappointed or just sad about having to wait more. The fact that i made a post about it probably makes it sound like i'm trying to whyne or something, not really, probably did that in the heat of my sad feelings Yeah i could agree that buying them on sales at such low prices would make it worth for the time i'd spend on them. But i still prefer keeping away from buying a module i'm not so interested in just to have a few flights. If i buy something, it is for a reason, and because i am 100% willing to use it plenty It's not really about the money, but the mindset of not falling into the habit of buying everything and anything because i can afford it. I wouldn't buy a bicycle if i were to ride it 5 times a year, even though i could totally afford it, it simply isn't reasonable to me I've been thinking for long about buying some Virpil hardware but always kept myself away from it for 2 reasons, 1st : Never found the proper time to do it as i felt it wasn't totally necessary for the amount of hours i was spending flying during certain periods of the year. I'm not on DCS regularly, i have periods on which i'll fly everyday for a month or 2 than drop out for a few other months, that and considering the cost of those hardware that are very expensive, it just just never seemed reasonable to spend the money. 2nd : The whole virpil hasle of actually being able to buy something in stock plus the time it takes to proceed the order and receive it, reading the virpil forum and seeing how much hasle most users had to go through to get their things really kept me away from making the step.

I could be wrong, havn't done a research to confirm it, but i strongly feel like i've read an official statement whether here or on a youtube video (And by official statement i mean reading something from an ED employe) back when the helicopter was first talked about in August-September 2020, and if i'm not mistaken, the statement said there was high hopes to see it around the end of the year and/or latest Q1 2021. Or a statement during the period between August and December, basically during that entire period leading to the end of the year. I do not own the Mi-8 and don't plan on buying it unfortunately. I'd rather buy modules i'm planning to spend lots of time in, rather than many whom i'm not so much interested in flying on the long run. Haha yeah technically that thing is already flying behind the curtain, too bad that will remain so until June

Excited by this chopper yet disappointed to understand that we won't be able to fly it before June. As stated in the announcement "We look forward to sharing more information closer to the Early Access RELEASE IN LATE Q2 2021". Late Q2 to me sounds like mid June minimum... And i thought we'd see that thing roaming the skies early Q1 2021 That's another 3 month waiting... Damn, the wait is long after we were pretty left understanding it would be flyable in EA by early 2021. Either way, i guess it's better to wait for a "decent" product rather than a premature one.

Pretty much that ! Am currently listening to it and it sounds like someone is snoring in the background at some points... Quite awkward

@robert.clark251 I can totally understand your passion and excitement for what you are putting forward and wishing to see happen ingame but i feel you are really looking too far at it. Let me explain. I feel i can connect to your feelings from what you are describing with the whole infantry thing combined with the armor and air part. This sounds excellent on paper/ in theory, i would also love to see in my life a game that can correctly combine the 3 aspects together on a scale and especially simulating it as good as DCS makes it for the aircrafts for now ! I've been a long time gamer and played all sorts of games, ranging from FPS ones, RTS, Simulators, you name it. While I always had that special part in my heart for the air simulations, i've always also enjoyed good FPS' trying to include the 3/4 branches into one game and that is (Air, Sea, Land, Boots), yet always focusing on one or 2 of these, it was fun and enjoyable to have them mixed all together somehow. The unfortunate reality is that i believe the technical side of creating such a dream would be very hard to put in place at least for now with current tech, i could very much be wrong as i'm no professional in game developpment but from the little knowledge i have of it, many technical sides need to be taken into account before being able to combine Air, Sea, Land and infantry together, especially on a scale and detail/simulation DCS does it for now. This is probably why none have done it to this day, at least to the point of recreating something authentic and as close to reality as possible. Computers/Servers probably wouldn't be able to handle such a highly detailed environment combining Air, Sea, Land and Boots on maps the size DCS brings to us. From all those games i've played to this day, there will always be a side of it sacrificed to allow one to be more indepth or having more focus to it. The best examples coming to mind are Arma, War Thunder, Battlefield series. These games have almost the full set combined yet one or more of those branches has been sacrificed because of necessity to allow the focused ones to be viable in terms of performance and playability i believe. Arma has always had their focus turned on the boots on the ground, yet having armor and air in the game, these 2 were sacrificed especially the air one feeling really bad (At least for the airplanes, not so much the helicopters). Plus not mentionning the size of the maps really not adapted for proper air warfare. War thunder on the other hand had their focus on the air part at least at their beginning, while not raising the bar to any level i would consider a simulator, they ended up bringing Armor and Sea warfare to it, but never infantry. Probably once again because of technical impracticality. Battlefield are probably the only ones who brought the 3 branches together in a somehow equal playing field, that said the infantry, armor and air. Of coarse the 3 are very much arcade but the 3 are balanced well enough to fight all together, that would be my point. The points to remeber here are : -Arma did a very decent job for the infantry part, i've read you and understand your point of view on it but Arma still to this day has managed something no others did, and i'm looking at many different points when saying that, don't want to name them all because too long. The Armor (Vehicles) is fun and pretty decent for its level of arcadyness i would say. The air is simply bad if you take the planes, but like said somewhere above the helicopters can be very fun and semi realistic if you fly with advanced physics for them. -War Thunder has Air, Land and sea but really has no feel of simulation to it appart from the "fake" gamemode they consider to be simulator (In the following lines, i'll be talking about War Thunder as if you were playing with the "simulator" gamemode). The tank gameplay while still closer to an arcade feel can be debated to still be fun and engaging somehow, while the air part just feels like your plane suddenly has weight and something related to lift and engine power. Yet infantry is none existant, probably because it would be too hard to manage any server running 40 player controlled tanks, 20 player controlled planes and let's say 80 player controlled infantrymen all at the same time -Lastly, Battlefield. While totally arcade in each category, i just wanted to highlight the fact that they've acheived the combination of all 3 aspects because of simplicity and balance of each units. Each map is relatively small with limits you cannot surpass without dying, the amount of vehicles is a fixed number same as the slots for infantry, all this allowing for that mix to work out seemlessly. Either way, my idea here is simply that i don't believe even in the next 5-8 years DCS has the possibility to bring infantry to a standard you would call a simulation or at least what you seem to be wanting in terms of details "I want a true scale, realistic infantry/SOCOM sim where weapons are high fidelity and represent their real world counterparts, along with all associated gear and uniforms for their prospective time periods.". DCS servers/and most PCs already struggle to handle 40-50 players at once so imagine the amount of players it would need to handle if you want to simultaneously mix the planes, helicopters, tanks and the infantry to an amount that would allow any decent combined operations... Just to be clear, I wouldn't mind seeing controllable infanty in DCS, even to a basic standard, but the amount of work that would be needed to make it even remotely immersive as the planes is once again i believe far from achievable. One thing that strikes me first is simply the terrain itself, as an infantry you spend 99% of your time on the ground slower than anyone else in a vehicle, yet relying on the terrain for a lot of the work you'll be doing "Attacking something, ambushing, defending, hiding, etc", the terrain in DCS is missing a massive amount of detail to make that even remotely viable to carry any proper work with infantry. The mesh of the terrain is very basic, trees and bushes are very basic again, natural obstacles like rocks or anything that would either allow you to take cover, hide or block you from passing once again are totally absent in DCS, imagine bringing the maps in DCS with their insane sizes to a level of detail adapted for infantry (Arma style) ? All this works well from the air because those details are mostly unnoticed while flying at 450knt at 5000feet, and simply because it would take an unnecessary amount of ressource from the computers for very little pleasure. I'm sure you understand all of this and hopefully you did think of it too, but i just doubt Battlefiled Prod could create such a universe within the airplane universe we already have, especially without a great deal of involvement from ED themselves (And I'm pretty certain ED has no interest in dedicating the amount of ressources needed to allow this). We are all allowed to dream and see big, but at the same time i like to stay realistic. Let's allow them to work on the ground part of DCS as a whole for a start, allowing them to raise the bar to a higher level from what we have right now, anything they'd do would already be a massive upgrade considering how far back the ground warfare is in DCS. Cheers @robert.clark251, i like your view and ideas to this but to me it's a bit of a pipe dream unfortunately.

I guess i'm also gonna add my part to this threat i find very interesting to say the least ! I'd like to warn you guys that this might be a little disorganized, sorry for that and please bear with me as i've got a few things to say Let me start by saying that i'd be very happy to welcome and know that a dedicated team would spend time working on the whole ground warfare of DCS, whether it be the production or update of assets, the well needed AI, or anything that could simply make it better in all its forms. Since the day i've bought Combined Arms, i've been able to get a feel for myself at how fun this module is, yet very basic, it allows for so many possibilities yet unseen or too greatly unnoticed by the bigger side of the community (At least that's my feel to it). I fell in love with how fun it gets to grab a vehicle and push the frontline while having the air boys above doing CAS. Or simply grabbing a AAA or SAM and waiting for that perfect opportunity to down a passing aircraft. I've always told people that CA has so many possibilities it could bring to DCS but unfortunately the majority of people don't bother about it or simply don't know how fun it can be ! Simply looking at how little usage CA has in any MP server goes to show how left aside the module is by the community, yet again quite sad considering the amazing things mission creators could come up with it ! It would be hard for me to tell you exactly what would make the ground warfare much more interesting as i have so many things in mind, but i guess a good summary would be to make it way more dynamic (Maybe that will happen with the coming Dynamic campaign ?), because as of right now, 99% of missions i've seen while playing MP has literally all ground units static waiting to be bombed, i feel the ground warfare would feel much more alive if for a start we'd see much more movement of those ground units, nothing like seeing a moving convoy, tank platoon, infantry squad or whatever and being like "I need to stop them from getting wherever they're going before they get there". On the other hand, a lot has already been said in this thread, been reading it over a few days, can't quite remember each of those interesting points. I guess i'd really enjoy controlling a ground vehicle and going about a certain mission with the assistance of other ground units going for a common objective with support from the air. But i don't see DCS becoming better at ground warfare over the air aspect we've got so far. DCS has to me always been centered around the air warfare and they've done an incredible job at it all this far, i'll always remain a flyboy after all (Yes my lovely 16 ). But of coarse this doesn't mean the ground aspect should be left to a very bare minimum. So as to not get carried away into more disorganization of my post, i'll finish up with what's more or less preoccupying me if Battlefield Prod had to get involved with the ground side of DCS. I think this had been mentionned a few times already in various ways but let me repeat it, i'd hope NOT to get into a division of the community because of module ownage and unavailability to play together because of it. I would NOT want DCS to become a showcase of an infinite e-shop module/payware thing. It could already be said that it is already, but the vast majority of what is sold are planes being modeled to high fidelity, massive maps, or campaigns containing multiple missions for a said aircraft. And appart from the maps at this point, there is literally none blocking you from joining a friend or a server even if you're the only one owning said plane. The price of these feels legitimate as they have been worked on deeply, especially with the planes and their insane systems complexity. I do stand with the many saying that all work deserves a pay, but i'm saying i wouldn't want to have a dozen different little modules to buy for each and every thing (For exemple : Each Nations ground units, a nations specific branch as in air land or sea, many different eras etc). I'd hope for it to stay as a whole, with as less different payments as possible to own something. I'm gonna end it here, sorry again for the disorganization.

Dear every single staff member of Eagle Dynamics, I would like to sincerely thank you for the very heart warming, beautiful, exciting, eagerly awaited work you've done all this long and to this day ! It is very hard for me to find the words allowing me to truly describe the joy and happiness you've brought in me as i watched the 2021 and Beyond video, not only because of the content of the video itself, but thinking of how incredibly good the work all of you people at ED have allowed this simulator to grow and become for all these years since i got myself into Lock On Modern Air Combat ! That is without talking about the amazing work you are still holding up for us, the amazing weather you've shown, the new vehicles all together, all of it even if not precisely what everyone wants still remains a very welcomed addition to the simulator you are building for us ! Thank you very much for all your work, for this product you are allowing us to use, you are amazing ! I wish you all an awesome Christmas and New Year, take care of yourselves. Long live Eagle Dynamics !

Hello there, before i start, may i receive my cookie please ? ;) First of all let me adress myself to you RocketmanAL, a very intersting post you got there, one aspect of the game that i'm really starting to enjoy more and more, the whole aspect of DCS : Combined Arms as a whole. I knew about this module for a long time but never found the right moment to decide myself into taking the step to buying it, i've always been way more focused on flying and blinded by the beautiful F-16 that finally made its appearance a year ago. The F-16 is a beautiful piece of equipment and progressing slowly but surely, i really wanted to dedicate my time to it all this while, which i don't regret and am still enjoying it very much with each little update that comes along to it. Yet the little i knew and saw of Combined Arms really kept itching me deep inside, i had to get it one day and finally took the step with the recent Halloween sales. There is simply no words to describe how fun and interesting it is to, well, combine :laugh:, high fidelity planes to ground forces, and allow the 2 to be manually played. I've been a long time player of all the Arma series, dating back to the very first Operation Flashpoint for the ones who know, and as a pilot in the soul, i always loved being able to support ground forces from the air, and even more when those ground forces were actually human players, as that adds so much more to it. Of coarse the difference between the Arma series and DCS is that they focus on the 2 opposing sides, one is focused on ground troop combat with "arcadish" air warfare, while the other one, DCS, focuses on air Warfare with "arcadish" ground combat. Since my purchase of CA, i've been playing around in the editor with the controlable ground vehicles and have been enjoying myself quite a bit, as much as DCS is not really aimed at the ground details, terrain mesh, building details, vegetations details, etc, maps like Syria clearly do make it feel like an upgrade from the Caucasus map, and that goes to show that with time, CA really has a potential to become even more interesting just because of how good the map details become. Anyways, i can totally understand with what RocketmanAL says about CA not being allowed massive dev time, and that is indeed very understandable, yet i feel like the community is clearly missing out big time on it, even in the state that CA is (More of an arcade ground battle simulator), the possibilities are massive, very few multiplayer servers actually include or allow the use of CA by players. I'll dive a little more into what's on my mind with the possibilities that CA could bring to mutliplayer servers, but first i wanted to finish off by saying that if only CA was put forward a bit more and known by a bigger part of the multiplayer community, with options to players on MP servers to use it, maybe CA wouldn't feel like a toy taking the dust in the majority of the time. Talking about the possibilities this module brings about, i've been playing regularly on this MP server that has frequent human ATC, AWACS and recently JTACs. The immersion and fun you get from having more human communications and interactions is truly remarquable. But with the recent implementation of the JTAC, some ground units were actually added and made controlable for anyone having CA and willing to use those units, whether to drive them to the front line and manually shoot targets or command them from the F10 map like a Commander and make it feel a bit more like Command & Conquer :P I discovered that possibility and immediatly started using units manually going around shooting what i could find, until an A10 pilot noticed me and asked if i wanted to direct him for some strikes and buddy lasing targets which i of coarse accepted and went on doing it from the vehicle i was controlling. It was simply super fun ! This whole experience could be made so much better with certain things being developped further, but even as it is, it made me discover a whole new aspect of playing DCS. Now it would really only come down to mission/servers owners to create interesting scenarios with the CA units, i've been dying to see the server i play on create 2 or 3 different frontlines with each having a blue force available to control by CA owners, literally allowing willing players to do something a little different than flying once in a while and still having tons of fun with the CAS pilots around. Coming to the whole SAM aspect of CA, i have to agree that at this point and with the fact that DCS is mainly based around air warfare plus taking into account the negatives of DCS ground warfare (ground details, terrain mesh, building details, vegetations details, etc), the SAM is probably one of the most fun units to play, no need to have highly detailed terrain mesh or anything related to ground level, because you're mostly gonna be focusing on everything above the ground of coarse :smilewink: And with that, nothing like downing a plane overflying you carelessly, or downing a jet engaging the CAS flights you're working with :spam_laser:. I found the idea of using SAM system to help out friendly unit super fun but could see it being just as fun if you were to be put on the opposite side trying to shoot down the players. Any well designed MP "dynamic" mission could easily allow the red units to be player controlled and therefore allow anyone with CA the possibility to jump into a red unit at any moment and defend whatever the area is from what ever the blue side is launching at them, while of coarse adding the human aspect in it and not relying on poor decision making AIs. If a server has a well designed front line, with an equal amount of red and blue units about to fight off each other, nothing better than allowing someone to go out using a Tunguska or Tor, or even an Abrams, T-90 and push that frontline either way ;) So to finish off, first of, i'll give you a big cookie if you made it all the way to here :P Second, all i want to say is that CA is definitely an awesome addition to my modules, really glad i have it, sad that it is still unkown to a lot of players and sad to not see it being used widely on MP servers or even SP missions, why not. Really hoping the module has intentions by ED to be worked on further, the possibilites it brings could be endless !

Hey, could you expand on that a little please ? Would like to know more as i'm interested in that :p

As much as it is a valid loadout that would work IRL doesn't mean it's a realistic loadout an airforce would use in a conflict or may i say has been used in a conflict. I play this game as a simulator, i try and simulate what i've got knowledge of and reproduce that into my gameplay. Your point of view feels like "If the game allows me to carry nukes because the plane is able to carry that many IRL than i shall carry as much as i can on every flight and use them on my ennemy because it is possible." As you figured by now, i'm not part of that mentality. I'd rather feel closer to how it is done IRL than being part of the people taking off with 10 fox 3s and the sole purpose of racking up as many kills as possible to feel like they are ace pilots.

Hahaha, well gotta say thanks to you ! You've allowed me to widen my knowledge of something i'd never seen ;) But i'm gonna have to use what you've said yourself, this was "was a promotional decision, not necessarily a tactical one." So kind of sets us back to what i was saying about an operational jet used in a conflict :)