Evoman

That's correct. Even an old 8-bit Nintendo looks better on an old CRT display than modern fancy displays.

This whole thread should be a good learning example of why you should always provide as much information as possible in the original post to get a quick no fuss acceptance or fix. When someone seeks help about a PC, Windows or other program issue in the IT forums they always usually provide all pertaining info and screen out put of the errors so that the problem can be resolved as quick as possible.

Exactly, that and the request for an F-16A which would make more sense over a newer block Viper. At least we have the Tornado mob at peace for now.

Not sure if you have heard yet but it was announced not too long ago that OctopusG has been working on the La-7 as a FF module. The module is very far along, and it is planned to be released into Early Access in the first part of 2023.

I would like to see more variety of aircraft types for different missions. We already have plenty of fighter planes but have no other military types. But I am glad that the C-130 will be paving a way for other cargo aircraft with a cargo system. I would like to see these aircraft someday: C-2 Greyhound F-111 Bucaneer E-2 Hawkeye S-3 Viking

Are you referring to the minimum or required specs? I was able to run DCS just fine with an i5-6600K 16GB, GTX 970 loaded on a HD on regular offline missions at 1080P/60fps. However I did notice performance drop in missions with lots of ground assets. But the performance improved dramatically when I moved DCS over to an M.2 NVMe drive. By this comparison you will see why the transfer speeds of NVMe drives are even faster then the average SSD. Traditional 7200 RPM HDD: 160 MB/s SATA III SSD: 600 MB/s PCIe Gen 3.0 NVMe M.2 SSD: 3500 MB/s Seq. reads – 3300 MB/s Seq. writes PCIe Gen 4.0 NVMe m.2 SSD: 7000 MB/s Seq. reads – 5000 MB/s Seq. writes

Well you can pretty much trust it if he is only speaking on behalf of ED. They currently have too much on their plate anyhow. Which leaves it to the 3rd parties to take on the project IF they can acquire a license. So all future request for the Super Hornet should be directed to 3rd parties hoping that one of them takes up the project.

I agree. I have been saying for a while that DCS needs to include a free trainer to better prepare new comers to step up to not only fast jets but to naval aircraft that are carrier capable. Aircraft like the T-6 would be nice but something like the T-45 would be of more useful to prepare people for carrier operations so that they can hit the deck running when they up grade to a Hornet, Tomcat and all future Naval aircraft like the A-6 Intruder.

While I do understand the desire for more MP aircraft that can be crewed with more than 2 players we also have to take into consideration DCS's current popularity compared to the other games mentioned which are more widely known about and have a bigger player base. However that is something that can change in the future that I see starting out with MAC drawing in a bigger player base looking for a simpler and quick entertaining experience with friends. Then once that awareness grows with MAC existence that will open the crossover to DCS for those seeking more. As for now I think other smaller MP aircraft would be more feasible like the B-25. But even that would require a 3rd party that would do it as a passion project at this point in time.

Sure it would be cool to have something more beastly like everything but you have to also take into account of the low intensity battle fields that modern AH-1W have faced. You can't compare that to the butt clenching action that AH-1G Cobras faced in Vietnam. I bet that once a Vietnam map arrives and devoted fans of that era start to make missions to really make the place come alive like it used to be back then that it will be one of the most popular servers to fly in if your looking for high intensity action.

Last I heard the A-29 Super Tucano was still in development by RAZBAM. So that's one option to be greatful for.

Excellent points. In my personal opinion it is just not the right time for the Super hornet just yet.

Now this is probably the best attempt I have seen by someone to actually try to help find the necessary data to bring an aircraft they want to DCS. Now you just need to find a third party to take on the project and figure out if any licensing would be required.

There has been a steady request over the years by a few for a regular single engine Cessna just to have a good FF Cessna. However I have always thought that the O-2 Skymaster would be a way better fit in DCS because it would actually be useful in combat and even more so in a Vietnam map.

I am glad that the Tornado is coming so that our European pilots can finally have one of their iconic aircraft. However I am more excited about the F-4 Phantom and the A-6 Intruder. But I do plan to eventually buy the Tornado later on when its fallen in price on a good sale to see what all the fuse is about.

Those are some very good observations I have not thought of before. It makes total sense why ED chose the aircraft it had already modeled. Which gives a good indication that future add on aircraft for MAC would derive from existing FF modules.

The original plans for MAC was to include a set list of 14 simplified aircraft. However its not clear if MAC will be limited to only these 14 aircraft or if more will be available for purchase later on. F-15C Eagle Su-27 Flanker B Su-33 Flanker D J-11A Flanker B+ MiG-29 Fulcrum A MiG-29S Fulcrum C A-10A Warthog Su-25A Frogfoot Su-25T Frogfoot F-86F Sabre MiG-15bis Fagot F-5E Tiger II MiG-21bis Fishbed L-39ZA Here is the some additional info about MAC: Each aircraft’s flight model, sounds, external model and cockpit is recreated to an exceptional level of detail and accuracy. Great care has been given to offer scalable gameplay that suits your personal levels and wishes. This includes intuitive and consistent keyboard controls between aircraft, selectable difficulty settings, option for more forgiving flight dynamics, and even the ability to fly these aircraft with just your keyboard. You can generate an unlimited number of missions using the Fast Mission Creator and Mission Editor. MAC also includes numerous instant action and single missions, as well as campaigns for most of the aircraft and is fully compatible with DCS World online! There are no limits to content. In addition to the full Caucasus map, MAC also includes a limited part of our Nevada and Persian Gulf maps. Key Features of MAC: 14 exceptional combat aircraft from the United States, Russia, China and Czech Republic. Shallow learning curve with consistent key controls between aircraft, and easy to fly with just a keyboard. Professional level flight models, but with option for forgiving flight dynamics. Play instant action, single missions and campaigns for most aircraft in single player or fly online. Supports Virtual Reality like Oculus Rift, HTC Vive and Windows Mixed Reality. Includes the Caucasus map and portions of Nevada and the Persian Gulf. Purchase MAC aircraft individually or as a pack at a reduced price. Flaming Cliffs 3 owners can purchase the MAC pack at a great discount. I agree that the AGM-65 are easier to use on other aircraft than in the Viggen but that is just one of those short comings that every aircraft has. However the Viggen is still fairly easy to operate overall compared to newer aircraft. I also would like to mention that I have seen more requests on here over the past years for FC3 aircrat to be made into FF modeules like the F-15C and the A-10A. The few FC3 level aircraft that are requested are for aircraft that are not feasible to do as FF like really modern aircraft like the F-22 or rare prototypes like the Tigershark.

You seem to be way out of date with the latest plans. ED has stated that they will be ending FC3 level aircraft and moving to MAC (Modern Air Combat ). MAC will be separate from DCSWorld and will be aimed at users who want to have quick fun and action. It will include several aircraft in one package. So it looks like your future will be limited to MAC. On another note its kinda of ironic that you like simple aircraft that are fairly easy to learn yet you have no interest in older aircraft that ARE easier to learn to operate. I recommend to at least being a little more open to slightly older aircraft FF modules. With the new ability test fly all aircraft during sale trail periods you can more easily see for your self if there is one that might be your cup of tea that you have not tasted yet. One of such aircraft that I have personally found to fit me like a glove is the Viggen. Its has just the right amount of sophistication for my taste yet its still easy to learn and remember how to operate it after being away for awhile.

This would be very useful to have once there is the ability to rescue downed pilots that either crash landed or ejected. It would give helicopter pilots a good purpose with another mission type they could do. Speaking of rescue missions here is an interesting rescue mission story involving another squad mate.

You probably would have better luck requesting military variants around here like the KC-46 Pegasus that would actually be of use in a combat flight sim.

FYI the earlier variants of the F-16A are distinct enough with their lighter weight to offer a completely different gameplay and character, analog cockpit, short range weapon only, but fantastic maneuverability. Another big plus is that the F-16A could be used on cold war servers. So an earlier variant of the F-16 would actually be a very good idea in this case because of the vast difference in performance and suitability it would offer.

I understand that there will always be customers with different tastes and demands. However the thing that has been getting tiresome to hear over and over is the demand for opposing Redfore BVR aircraft. I understand the natural need to have an opposing force but it is simply not possible to implement the BVR Redfore forces that most demand at this point in time with current restrictions. The Mig-23 is the newest we'll get, the Mig-29 plans are cancelled. So as long as BVR customers understand that and are content with just getting to experience those aircraft in single player mode or against each other I see no problem with it.

In my opinion it would be better if other weapons were available through a different variant that actually used them. A good example of this is the F-15I. There have been recent mentions by RAZBAM of them possibly doing a F-15I variant of the Strike Eagle which is a very unique Israeli version. In this case it would make better sense to just have the different weapons systems available through a different variant that actually employed them since there weapons systems were epitomized to use them.

Your best realistic option is going to be for multiple variants. That way you can chose the variant that's your particular cup of tea for the mission at hand. With the the new Mirage F1 plans of there being future variants, it should prove to be a very interesting strategy that might be popular enough to show that its worth doing multiple variants for the developers if the variants are not too drastically different.

Sorry I mistook a list of countries that had surviving F-100 on display. I have corrected my original list.