Varis

Hi, any news of the tournament? With more and more new helis coming to DCS plus new maps, one would think there's a large population looking for fun events like this? Also is the comms still on SRS, that might limit the pilot pool quite a bit in contrast to more popular platforms like Discord?

Multicrew Mi-8 is impressive by itself already :thumbup:

2 new maps, helicopter multicrew... and... Mi-24. Awesome stuff!:pilotfly: Also voice comms. Sorely needed :thumbup:

Guys. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4287187#post4287187

Subscriptions have been used very successfully in the MMO world. And the insight that DCS is more like a service is spot on - quite similar to MMOs, we get all the fixes and features to the modules, not to mention the core engine, without paying for them specifically (disregarding maps, CA, etc...). The issue is pressing because tying revenue streams to module releases creates moral hazards and the developers may be pressed to pump out excessive new modules. We have not seen the worst of this but who knows what the future brings. There is lots of devil in the details. For starters the monthly subscription would probably need to be around $80, which might be a bit difficult to market so it would have to be broken down to say pay $20 to fly all the helicopters, or $20 for all WW2 aircraft, or $30 for all bluefor jets, another $20 to fly all the maps. Remember that people might take the subscription and decide they don't like a given module so it's another $20 or $80 of lost revenue from a single subscription. With "lifetime" module purchases, player retention is probably much easier than with a subscription. If somebody has a module they like, they will be coming back to DCS without having to make the decision to swipe their credit card every month. Instead they'll want to make the best out of their expensive investment. They may even buy more modules when they get the thing going again and fall in love with what is new in DCS. The contracts with 3rd party developers would have to be renegotiated. ED would have to sell the model to them which could be difficult. A developer can now recover much of the development costs when the new module is released, whereas with subscriptions it would likely be a really slow trickle and possibly make financing the projects somewhat challenging. When suggesting new commercial models for DCS you always need to think of how it works for the 3rd party developers, even if we lack much of the detailed information on the interactions between ED and 3rd party developers so we'll never be able to say the final word on whether a model could work or not.

I don't think my stick settings are anything special. The Gazelle felt quite lively at first, but after a bit I got used to it, it's not really hard to fly and some ways it's very forgiving. Do turn on the autopilot channels to get the automatic stabilization. I'd think the Mi-8 is maybe the easiest to fly, seems to handle quite peacefully. But haven't flown that and the Huey that much. I think the Ka-50 is a bit more temperamental than the Gazelle but it's all very subjective. The right answer of course is to try them all and fly the best one the most =)

The Viggen is lovely :thumbup: Sad they left out many important ones :helpsmilie:

It's a great move :thumbup: But where are all the wonderful helicopters? Ka-50 only, on the last days... :huh:

But delivering completed modules probably involves higher costs because you need more internal testing. Also the commercial advantages. Eg. when ED has the option to cash in at year 1, 2 or 3 - their choice - on each module, the financing is much more easier and flexible.

Multicrew can be pretty important in multiplayer - it's a key factor in the charm of the F-14 and L-39, and plays a small part even in the Gazelle. If ED manages to up their game in multicrew with Mi-24, several modules down the road will benefit - or even become possible in the first place, in case of some two seaters. The downside is of course, that yes, it can cause further delay...

It's actually positive news they have a prerequisite item and sounds like Mi-24 will be bumped up in priority once that's done. The module doesn't live in a vacuum but could be relying on some platform upgrade like that. In the end we get more as rotorheads. Just goes to underline the complexity and extremely long time span of ED's project as a whole. They work slowly with many projects in parallel, very different from many other game developers, even MMO creators facing similar complexities.

It's pretty surprising how much mindshare helicopters seem to command here. The clamour for redforce fighters is not a big surprise, although it seems pretty strong indeed even taking into account some forum bias. WW2 doesn't seem to do quite as well here as in sales.

How many side-by-side multicrew aircraft do we have? Medium-range dedicated strike aircraft?

Agusta A129 WZ-10 Ka-52 Eurocopter Tiger HAL Light Combat Helicopter Mi-28 Mi-2 Ka-29 PZL W-3 Denel Rooivalk Apache Ka-26 Su-27 Mig-25 (all variants) Mig-31 Mig-29 Su-15 Su-24 Su-34 EA-6A or B OV-10 (Bronco) JAS 39 Avro Vulcan He-111 Bristol Blenheim A-20 (Havoc) B-25 (Mitchell) B-24 (Liberator) Kawanishi H8K ("Emily") Short S25 Sunderland Consolidated PBY Catalina (amphibious version?) Ki-67 Hiryu ("Peggy") Mitsubishi G4M ("Betty") Zero And a few Soviet cold war bombers too...

I don't know any pilot who's been active for a while and has only 1-2 modules :smilewink: A-10 and F-18 both are fairly complex aircraft and the main risk I see with them is the feeling of being overwhelmed, there is quite a lot to chew. It may depend on the case, budgets, personality etc. I think people who come with a very rigid plan (idea what they are going to do) of set goals and schedules have the hardest time here. There is no other way than baby steps learning your aircraft and DCS. The advantage with historic or trainer aircraft is that you get much more quickly to a point where you feel you master the basics and know all the functions they have (Mig-15 doesn't really have that much compared to a F-18 ). One really good option for you could also be the F-5E, I think mentioned (again) in a different thread, as it would let you do almost everything you've been planning for (no radar missiles etc though) but reportedly works well as a sort of an advanced trainer. If you are prepared to take baby steps and psychologically capable of working a training program which you know you won't complete in a long, long time (it's harder than what it sounds), then there might be no issue with the F-18. It's one of the newer modules, popular, well made, extensive, the flight model is very good... Just don't expect to chase migs off the sky on day one, the learning curve and the depth of enjoyment DCS offers is much longer and deeper than that. When you're new to DCS it's reasonable to expect a few false starts and a couple of roadblocks, but there's also the community to help you. Start with humble mind and expect the unexpected. Eventually you'll try out different aircraft before you find the one that really clicks and is tons of fun to fly. But learning your 2nd aircraft is already much easier - not only because you learned to learn new aircraft - you already know also DCS with all its functions, mission setup, camera angles, h/w setup... Lets you relax in your chair and concentrate on the feeling of discovery with the new aircraft itself. Also don't miss videos as a source of training/preparation, the community puts out a lot of quality content.

Welcome and good luck with the VR, many pilots seem to swear by it once it's running well. What are your goals/expectations with DCS btw? Just having some fun flying, really learning some particular aircraft, seeing how the military guys do things (I'd think you'd have lots of familiar things ahead of you too, but assumed you do civilian aviation), or maximum immersion? Historic and trainer aircraft might have a lot to offer for you. The L-39 and C-101 have different strong sides, ED has a great campaign for the L-39 which can really boost your flying skills and is like an extended training course.

Somebody might vote for that but the OP just asks what we think that ED thinks it is. Broken :smartass: More blu/red rotary wing would be cool of course... but the big TODOs are all non-aircraft.

90% of the time it's just alt-tab to whatever Chuck's Guide is relevant that day. Tablet, 2nd monitor, or kneeboard occasionally.

Factors to consider: -Your system upgrade/build cycles -How much space you need -Your budget -Cost of cables/mounting hardware if you go SATA vs available M.2 slots -Your other performance needs 970 EVO Plus is dramatically faster hardware but slightly pricy. 1TB sounds like a good pick but it depends on your needs. Check if they still sell 970 EVO at a lower price, the performance difference to Plus is not big... One option could be to move other storage to a regular HDD. The results from hansangb are interesting. Could be that the disk is no longer the bottleneck in loading once you have a decent SSD (there are performance differences between models) but there is some processing which requires eg. the CPU?

It's good to take it slow, gather information and make a plan with priorities. Obviously getting a system that can run the game is the most important. I get very good results with a well built mid-tier gaming PC (without VR). The next important thing I would say is a good joystick. I started with just a good cookie cutter joystick (Logitech) and you don't really need anything else to enjoy DCS. The other peripherals are more of a "full experience" thing and I upgraded to them little by little over time... still running that very old joystick which is now the weak link :D I would say take your time and don't buy crap because eventually you might want the top of the line kit that is popular here. Saves you some money :smilewink: The main advantage may well be that the system is easy to keep up to date over the years as DCS grows and evolves. A prebuilt PC can also serve as a good starting point if you've done your research and gone for a good one. Probably requires you to learn about the components though. I find decent air cooling very easy to build nowadays. There are very good cases like the mid towers from Fractal Design, the fan slots are large and quality fans are both quiet and effective, components don't often have a huge TDP for what they do - if you go for higher end components the heat dissipation increases and then you have to plan more carefully. In conservative mid-tier systems it's easy to go for an overkill, I have 5 case fans and think 3 would easily do the job. There is a big benefit from doing your research on the fans, though.

What kind of an experience are you guys looking for? What aircraft, what kind of simulation, in the end? If you wanted to do the training program really properly you'd start with Christen Eagle, then proceed to a trainer, before finally converting to an actual jet fighter or other mainstay combat aircraft :D That said the L-39 apparently has a superb training campaign. Also do check out the Red Flag campaigns.

At least some things never change :D It could be that the project is just much more complex and risky (possibly - I mean, hopefully - involving some core engine updates too), so ED wants to be more tight lipped. Optimal expectations management in fact. Trying to be an optimist and thinking Mi-24 will be like the Viper, ED has changed its approach in a few things recently. PS. You guys didn't pay attention to the loadout?

It feels this is a bit in response to the player community criticism. Indeed DCS coming to the new year seems to be going into a nice direction! Dedicated server and the partially delivered new voice comms (not mentioned :noexpression:) are making the multiplayer side more viable and the dynamic campaign (when eventually ready to launch) will enhance the game to be a much more richer and deeper experience all around. Plus what seems to be 6 new maps coming (one of them free; https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1931687&postcount=5) - they have a lot of interesting stuff on the plate. Personally quite happy that many of the new aircraft are helicopters (count at least 4 in the works) - hoping for some love on the core side to match this. If you look at my earlier call - https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=227081 - some of the issues are being addressed spot on. I would love some more emphasis on Combined Arms, it was released many years ago but never developed its potential - what I conclude from ED communications it's getting some attention but is not high priority at the moment. Still, lots of awesome stuff already there or coming over the next few years.

People writing on the forums tend to be different from the mass of paying customers. (Although they are a subset... and often an important one.) The WWII modules are generally the best profit makers - I'd give you a source but I can't remember if Wags said that in an interview or on the forum but it was maybe a year ago. ED and the other developers have to make some hard calls between pursuing their passions, bringing in the money and listening to the fans on the forum. The main thing people should understand is that a flight sim platform is very different from your usual gaming product. The feature set is very demanding and it's a niche product (although DCS apparently has attracted quite a few paying customers over the years). ED's resources are spread very thin. (This is one of the non obvious observations, too.) Also they are not known for being one of the world's leading organizations in terms of software process or customer communication (although things have improved over the time, at least in the last 12 months or so). But it doesn't really matter that much to us long term fans - they have few competitors and they are delivering a great product. Maybe in 2020 we won't see everything that was "promised" for 2017, but DCS in 2020 will still be better than in 2019 even if your favourite module/feature isn't in despite all your hopes. Patient and sometimes very forgiving waiting is the best approach for your sanity. It's not really that easy. Send in an office worker and they'll not understand the replies, you'll get a status "they're working on it" and when pressed for delivery dates it's "maybe next month". Send in a developer/project manager without a long experience in the business and they will fail to understand the potential problems/blockers still to come down the road and you'll get "probably next year", then you'll again throw a fit when it's not there when the time comes. That's the technical/project management aspect but then there's marketing aspect - they'll have to create some hype and buzz to keep the gaming community interested. And the community management/customer communication aspect... oh boy reading this forum I don't envy the job. (I hear Hoggit and places is even much worse...)

Thank you Sir that was a pretty well reasoned and detailed post :geek: I do think the quality + platform features really matter with DCS. Out of curiosity which one is your favourite module/map/campaign so far? Personally I just buy the stuff from RAZBAM etc and think it's great. (Been flying the Harrier recently and enjoying LMAVs... obviously I'll still give the Mig-19 a bit of time etc but I think Ka-50 is the only module where I have enough skill to be annoyed by the bugs, if they are bugs, there's a few hazy things there.) The Gazelle flies great too! If somebody would have come to you 10-15 years back with the current DCS spec, what it does and what it models, the list of modules, how much FPS you get without issue etc you would have just told them to stop trolling and get lost :megalol: