Feuerfalke

Sadly this will NEVER change. As long as DCS is being developed, upgraded and an active project, we will always find DCS incomplete. The expectations in realism will rise with each upgrade that is less than perfect (and any simulation is less than reality), while computing power and graphics will constantly grow and change, making adaptations and new standards neccessary and demanded.

Thank God this is to compare, not to compete with :) On a second thought, even reality may advance.

"Time to wake up or fall behind" IS a comparrison. A racer that runs his race alone with nobody in sight and no laptime to compare himself to, can't fall behind anything.

It seems to be a key element of EDGE to release the map-making-tools to the public. This would give people the chance to engage as 3rd-Party-Developers for mapmaking. Isn't that exactly what we are waiting for? I don't know what the CryEngine is capable of, but I know that the ED-Team knows best what's good for their project and what's not. So comparing an unknown engine to one that maybe able to do something from a consumers point of view is pretty pointless IMHO.

Will it? There's a ton of work already gone into EDGE and a map for this engine, too. What sense would it make to buy an engine and then redo the map all over again?

Hi and welcome. A Yoke is fine for flying. I've got a couple of friends flying DCS and WW2-planes with Yoke. Make sure that you don't have 2 devices mapped to the throttle. If you have Throttle mapped to an axis on the Yoke and to an axis on the Throttles, they interfere with each other.

The fact that they don't move the blades doesn't mean the wind isn't there.

Couldn't say it any better. For the A-10C & Stang rudders are pretty handy and imersive. For the KA-50 and especially for the Huey rudders are a must have.

Cool! Seems like DCS gets more professional and userfriendly with every patch :thumbup:

Absolutely. I've shown friends a quick trick on BF3 and they asked me, if I ran a soundmod for the game. Next day 5 of 7 had ordered themselves soundcard.

Hm, but if one plays music better, doesn't that still make a difference? ;)

The XFi Extreme Gamer is a good soundcard. I had the chance to test a few modern soundcards and it's still one of the most easy cards to use. The problems Soundblaster had with it's drivers when Vista and Windows7 were new, are definitely history. The Asus Xonar is also pretty neat. It offers a better soundrendering, but lacks some gaming-features. It's more designed for music in most regards.

Kave? The Roccat Kave? Well, that explains it. I have one of those, too. Try a Hifi-Headset, not one that cutts off bass at 50 Hz and transforms it into vibration. You will learn to love the difference and you will only use the Kave to collect dust, just like I did. Besides that: it's undoubted, that you can use an equalizer to make the sound of an onboard prettier. But that was not the question, was it?

That's not quite correct. A soundcard delivers a better sound with basically no CPU-load. It's superior in stereo and it's world apart with 5.1 or 7.1 ! The only problem is: If you use a 100$ Soundcard and a 10$ headset or speakers, you won't hear any difference from the onboard sound. If you decide to invest some money in a decent 5.1 system or buy a Hifi-Headset plus seperate microphone, though, the difference will be :surprise: Question is, how much of that you will notice with A-10C. The sound is great, but given the nature of flying an aircraft, it's pretty boring. If you play egoshooters, a soundcard with its clearer stereo-seperation is a definite advantage.

To all parents out there.

Do you need to be able to look into the future to see there is a winter coming, followed by another summer? If you want to save the money, patience is your only guide. There's no magic to that. And if you really need to do this by the book, use the search-function and look up previous sales. Season-sales are probably season-sales, because the repeat themselves with the seasons. No crystal-ball needed here either.

And that is exactly the point, where you are so wrong and unjustified mad at the wrong persons: because nothing in our whole existence can ever be relied upon until it already happened. That has nothing to do with some peoples signatures or posts. It's a fact of our linear existence, that prohibits us to see exactly when things will happen and how.

CH really is one of the most reliable sticks on the market - if not THE most reliable. I've used my first CH Fighterstick for over 14 years, before I replaced it. And the only reason I replaced it, was my mainboard no longer supporting a gameport. :) @ Software: IMHO both CH and Saitek offer very usefull and easy to program software. Just that CH offers the depper scripting for advanced users. They are both a lot more userfriendly, thank the TM-Software, though.

Saitek will give you a very good stick for the money. The programming-software is easy to use and you have many buttons and axes to program. You can even switch between 3 layers of profile, if you want to, you can even program 6 layers. On the other hand, you will reach certain limitations when it comes to complex macros or even scripts. CH offers a great HOTAS with an equally easy programming-tool. Besides normal programming (with shifted function), it also allows 3 different layers, which also makes up for 6 layers, if you really need them. But beyond just mapping buttons CH offers the option for scripting, which comes in very handy if you want something special - changed sensitivity, different behaviour depending on which buttons are pressed, toggle-functions, and a lot more. On the hardware side, Saitek offers a modern HAL-Sensor for the stick. The mechanics are not well layed out, though. Removing the sliders inside the housing and glueing the magnets in the correct positions by trial and error makes the stick much more precise and responsive. (Search the forums for X52 precision mod). Large point for critics is the centering mechanism. It wears out quickly and needs to be tuned in order to make precise movements and allow for good centering. CH is based on conventional potentiometers, but with decent mechanics: Simple, sturdy and very precise. Biggest plus for me is the 2-axis-springs: you can feel very precisely, when you start pulling or pushing the nose, or roll left or right. At any given angle, you can sense how much input to either side you are giving and where the dead-zone for each axis is. The other really great thing about the CH-gear is the throttle. Yes, it's not modelled like a real throttle. Not even close. But it's fully optimized for desktop-usage! Every single button is easily accessable from any throttle position. Something you can't honestly say when putting the TM Warthog or X52 on your desk.

Sorry, but that seems not quite correct:

On the contrary. There are civilian aircraft involved in many wars since WW2. For transportation, for extraction, etc. And even better: Think of escorting or piloting the Air Force One, intercept stolen cargoplanes, hijacking an jumbo or cessna with some hightech-equipment and escape the wolfpack, ...

You'll find this attitude for any fanbase. It's just more tragic, as this community has an average age 20 and more years above games like BF3 and CounterStrike... Plus: we should be thankful for any virtual pilot bying this software and keeping this genre alive.

There's a nice quote from somebody: If you want a 100% simulation, you have to do it in reality. A-10C is not 100 % accurate, not 100 % complete, not even 100 % realistic in every regard. But, it's 100 % the closest thing to reality you can find without being in the military. And that is more than enough for me.

I'd love to see a DCS-tanksim.