isoul

AFAIK trim is working right, you may need to check what trimmer method(new or old) you are using in the options->gameplay menu(lower right).

Is it me or in the Training Videos trainer doesn't use the realistic flight model? He is very accurate at doing everything!

...and don't believe that the Longbow version is all that counts in a battle! Still many armies use AH-64A upgraded to A+ just to be able to cooperate with Longbow Apaches. In a group of 4 AH-64s, three are A+ and one is Longbow (pinpointing targets and distributing them to the 3 A+ which engage them). Of course US Army don't really need to do that since most their Apaches are the D version but still I don't think that every Apache fly shorties with the Longbow equipped. To me this isn't a problem since we fly the Shark but in real life(after a little research I 've done) a Ka-52 would act like a Longbow Apache(with its advanced sensors) coordinating the rest Ka-50. In our simulation (DCS), having the Longbow Apache simulated means two things: 1) The Longbow radar won't operate realistically since sensor functions are usually classified. The simulation of the Longbow would probably be more of a guess of its function rather than an actual simulation the way ED does it. 2) To use all its functions you probably need real people flying with you. Just a question... Wich variant of A-10 the DCS with simulate, the A or C variant? What about its RWR function? I think I've red somewhere, but can't remember where, that RWR is classified too! So are we going to get RWR with approximate functionality or it won't be simulated at all?

Still many companies believe that its less expensive for them to distribute digitally only. I understand that since there are no DVD copying or manual printing etc. etc. But wait...are the digital versions any cheaper than boxed ones? Nope, you just pay the same and get less! The only thing a digital download is good for is to find games that somehow never published in your country or find games that aren't sold(or are rare to find) in the selves of most stores.

Oh I give up! Probably that's why my retailer suggested them as a replace for my faulty original 8800GTS... Still, I get better performance with GTS250 compared to 9800GTX+ which have e x a c t l y the same (basic)specs. EDIT : The rest of the system remained exactly the same. The driver used with 8800 and 9800 were the same but with GTS250 were newest version. Still the performance increased quite much for just a new version of the driver. Can't say anything else cause I haven't searched the matter further since the 9880 and GTS250 were a free replacement of my faulty 8800(as mentioned above).

Thats true for 8800,9800 and GTS250... But I am not that sure that the overall performance is exactly the same since with GTS250 I get better performance(in most other games) given that all 3 cards(especially 9800GTX+ & GTS250) have the (almost) the same specs(freq etc etc).

According to my experience : Trim&AP channels : Practise with trimming, read the new and old way of trimming and decide whats best for you. I prefer the new one. When you are somewhat familiar with the Trimming(it isn't that difficult) you should learn the way the AP works/affects the helicopter. 1) Disable all AP channels and try to fly the Ka-50. 2) Enable AP channels and use Flight Director to see how the control dumbing affects the helicopter 3) Once familiar with this and in conjuction with your trimming skills you may deactivate Flight Director and you will eventually get used to flying it quite precissely. REMEMBER Trim & AP channels(even ALT HOLD) are USEFULL and makes your work easier! On the X52 Stick... I use it too. In my opinion the X52 is a bit light-weight and if set to default its quite sensitive and the flight of the Ka-50 becomes aggressive. Once lowering the sensitivity of the control I could do all the smooth handling required to fly the Shark.

As above posters said I can confirm you that DCS:BS performance won't increase that much with a powerful GPU. Having tested with 3 already (8800GTS/768MB, 9800GTX+/1GB, GTS250/1GB) I got almost the same results (25-35fps while in cockpit). Thats easy to understand since DCS may have nice graphics but the really hard time is when CPU has to calculate all the trajectories of bullets/missiles and the forces that are applied on your helicopter while in flight(very realistic flight model). I hope that next week, or the week after, I ll be able to post any increase with my new Q9400 CPU. Currently I am using an E6600. Oh btw... get DCSMax since this utility/launcher will help you enable the additional cores your CPU may have and hopefully increase the game's performance (someone post a link for downloading DCSMax please).

Keep in mind that, as far as I know, Steam has some restrictions in place for modders. I used to play Warhammer40k : Dawn of War(fantasy strategy) and I liked the feature you could put your own army badges&banners. Now that DoW2 is on Steam the modding isn't that easy...not to mention that Games for Windows Live restricts every mod that isn't from the game company. More or less putting DCS on Steam would be just another reason to be frustrated since I only reasons that Steam is install in my PC is DoW2 and Empire:Total War. If I had the option to get these two games without having to use Steam I would go for it even if it would prove 10euros more expensive SINCE STEAM OFFERS ALMOST NOTHING!

On the fact that there were only two entries for the campaign competition. Given that the game's English Boxed version hasn't even been out for a year, meaning that the most community members that are interested in creating a campaign/mission aren't that familiar with the Editor, the fact that we have two campaigns with such good quality is incredible. Yeah, it would be better to have 10 or 20 entries with such quality but would that be possible. Remember that both teams put a great efforts to build these campaigns. Good luck to both of you!

1) Even here in Greece it was possible to find DCS:BS at a very friendly price(28euros) for such a good quality of the product. 2) Sim is excelent indeed. 3) KF fun or not DCS is something very different. The community here is one of the best I 've seen. Welcome onboard!

In Greece it was somewhat hard to find it in the beginning but almost a month after its release we could easily find it.

Indeed the Iraqi Air Defenses weren't that well prepared for defending against helicopters and indeed the SEAD aircraft have more means to engage and defend against SAMS and AAA(HARM, ECM etc.). On the front line I suppose that tank hunters ,like attack helos, has a chance to take out enemy AAA or short range SAM launcher. Greek army uses Apaches against OSA-AK/TOR-M1 scenarios for training purposes but they never tried (for some reason :music_whistling:) to pit them against the Patriot or S-300 SAM systems which are long range.

I got your point! The truth is that once enabled the sound has more bass as Bucic reported(didn't see any other difference since I just run the game for a couple of minutes). I didn't see any difference in FPS (some ppl says ALchemy lowers FPS some others say thatit doesn't and that in specific games the FPS may increase depending on rest of the hardware). So I ll leave it enabled, a bit of bass more never heart anyone... other than my neighbors!

Who said that 2nd place is not good? The genre is displaced by publishers for many years. They even tried to "attract" genre's fans by publishing flight action titles (like HAWX). Many PC game magazines/sites haven't even mentioned the DCS:BS. Now DCS achieved 2nd place, gathering much more votes than Dragon Age which was one of the most anticipated games of 2009 with numerous reviews, exceptional press coverage and outstanding scores. Now we are : "Hey guys! Whats on the 2nd place? Did you "miss" something?" Thats a win for DCS,ED and the Sim community! Irrelevant While I was in absent my cat stepped on the keyboard and typed : I think you should know it!

Is the Russian section of the community aware of the voting?

Just a thought... given the advantages/disadvantages of both aircraft and helicopters who would be best to suppress SAMS/AAA? I think that in many cases the helicopters can be used cause their ability to fly at low altitudes and use terrain to get in cover (these are the tactics used by Wild Weasel role aircraft in SEAD missions). I 've found in wiki that : During Operation Desert Storm on 17 January 1991, eight AH-64As guided by four MH-53 Pave Low III, were used to destroy a portion of the Iraqi radar network to allow bomber aircraft into Iraq without detection. So SEAD performed by helos has some advantages! Stupid to ask but how do you define symmetric/asymmetric mission/battlefield? I ve heard only about symmetric/asymmetric threats so far and I dunno if the meaning is the same!

GDI Orca looks like a blend of A-10 and Osprey engines mounted on a helo fuselage.

Bucic, since you report tha ALchemy improves FPS I ll give it a try. If it doesn't on my system I 'll probably disable it since the lack of 3D sound isn't of much difference (I got 2.1 speakers and stereo headphones) in BS.

I think the OP meant that Shkval does not keep track of moving targets. You need to check if you get a lock in the first place (the ΤΓ symbol if I remember right on the Shkval screen). As the OP describes it, the first thing coming to my mind, is that he is unable to lock a target probably cause of the distance, wrong shval gate size (too big or too small) or wrong place of shkval gate (happens when trying to lock a distant target... you can be easily "miss" the target)

First of all, as far as I know, in Falcon4.0 AF the level of detail of simulated ground/air assets aren't that high as in DCS:BS. DCS focus on one aircraft at a time to achieve this. ArmA isn't even a simulation close to DCS standards. Wouldn't all the stuff I mentioned above make ED lose focus on its current goals or spend too much resources on it? Can all these be possible with the level of detail ED does things? I just wanted to say that I like the way DCS is evolving. Focus on making a great simulation and such changes may come when time comes. (Falcon4.0-1998, F4AF-2005 thats seven years later and its still evolving to present day)

Wasn't Ubisoft the publisher of the Silent Hunter sub sim series? Unfortunately most companies go after easy money... this means that ultra-realistic, hard to learn games that keep you busy for a long time(such as flight combat sims/study sims) has not the potential to become Top-Sellers at the publisher's eyes. Most companies focus in getting customer's money, keep him busy for 30-50 hours at best then make him go buy the next game. ED, fortunately, acted differently. They ignore that atm there is a lack of decent sims and the sim audience is "hungry" for a game like DCS! ED pleases its customers(us) and we will reward ED when the time comes.

The addition of a one virtual battlefield(or several instances of one) like in MMOs or adding playable ground/sea vehicles/vessels would be nice as a thought BUT there are several problems and drawbacks of such designed... A few coming in my mind : 1) Several people join the battle means several skill levels on the same game. Thats not good for everyone and especially those who want to face a challenge as close to reality. 2) Such multi-player battlefield needs many people to participate and taking completely different roles(fighter/bomber pilots, tank crews, SAM/AAA crews) which won't appeal to everyone(fighter role is much more apealling than AAA crew/driver). 3) Many people playing at the same time together means there is a desperate need of command%communications. That is very difficult to have in a simulation! 4) Having to simulate several completely different vehicles adds more difficulties. Ka-50 is single seat, Apache is two-seat, a tank needs at least 3 people to operate it... I won't mention a sea vessel. Who gonna operate vehicles with more than 2 seats? And if we have them, how many multi-seat vehicles would you like on the map? What kind of server and network infrastructure can support this? 5) Computing power constrains and would limit the possible participant of such a game or would force developer not to include so much realism and detail in the simulation (like ArmA). ED developed DCS to be a decent simulator, a flight simulator, and in my opinion they achieved it(thx ED btw)! Try to be master of many things and you 'll master none. I like how DCS is right now, its one of the few specials in its kind. What described at OP is more like another BattleField,Armed Assault etc etc with the market having already too many! Having more players playing together online and having multi-platform interoperability (DCS+LO for example) is achievable though!

Thats a nice fictional excuse!

Thanks for taking time to answer. Since you are mentioning the unwillingness to pit two nuclear powers against each other and since you admit there is no explanation of how terrorists got their hands on such weaponry here are a few idea how to overcome such difficulties. 1) Pitting two modern powers one against the other(like US vs Russia): Think of it as repetitive, restraining to the theater of war or whatever you like but it isn't a good idea. SOLUTION : Pit two different nations. Unfortunately world today offers many possible conflicts in a wide range of theaters of war. Smaller nations have their own friends and foes, likes and dislikes. You are using India and Pakistan very well on that. Korea is another example. Balkans region has quite many fictional or old adversaries(Yugoslavia-Croatia, Yugoslavia-Albania, Greece-Turkey). Middle-East I don't need to say anything else on that. 2) Having a good excuse for weaponry of different origins : Besides that, using minor nations as your adversaries can solve that problem too. Some minor nations have a tradition of multiple suppliers of military equipment that would excuse the mix of weaponry of different origins. In Greece(where I come from), for example, we are using Apaches&F16(US), Leopard II tanks(German), Mirage2000(French), TorM1 and BMPs(Russian). Same goes for Cyprus with more Soviet weapons. Turkey also has a mixture of weaponry in lesser extend(Turkey was even thinking of buying Ka-52 from Russia). Another good way to excuse hi-tec weaponry in the hands of extremists is the scenario of a rebellion or dictatorship where all or just a part of a nations weapons fall in the wrong hands. 3) Factions : To use terrorists-extremists in your story is just to excuse the presence of an enemy in/near your country were another Tactical Force couldn't reach that easily. Venezuela for example, hard to reach! Parts of China, hard to reach! Philippines, hard to reach! Egypt or Libya! I hope to give you some good ideas for your next effort! Keep up!