Cobra847 Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 It's a simulator, not a game. Nope. Nicholas Dackard Founder & Lead Artist Heatblur Simulations https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/
Phantom88 Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Haha!!! "Delaymeister" Nice Nicholas;) Patrick
MiG21bisFishbedL Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 How are summers in Northeria, anyways? Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!
Plushanubka Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Nope. So... Mig-23 comfirmed? :music_whistling:
Brisse Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 It's a simulator, not a game. Nope. I'm with you Cobra. DCS isn't an abbreviation for "Political Simulator". I appreciate that ED and partners are trying to stay away from politics. It's a sensitive subject that can bring unwanted attention and conflict when you least expect it, and it can lead to situations where some content end up offending someone, even if it wasn't intentional. Anyone who refuse to call DCS a game is taking it way to seriously. In my opinion, it is both a simulator AND a game. It doesn't have to be only one of those things.
MiG21bisFishbedL Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Simulators of this nature are games. Full stop. They're for consumer enjoyment. That's okay. Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!
Farlander Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 They could make a fictitious campaign setting the Mig-21 in the right side with the Russians, setting whatever country they want. What is wrong if they do like that?? We see this example everyday online with missions and is not a bad deal and everybody do well enough. What gone be the Mig-23 campaign by Leatherneck?? F-14 with the Mig-23 as wingman against the Chinese F-16... then they gone write a nice briefing with apologies: we don't like hurting hearts... come on Thy could make a more "realistic" mission, but it is completely up to them.. Yes, i think i would have liked a "classical scenario" better, but i see no problem with the current one. and i definately think that suggestion you made for the F-14 would be... interesting..
Farlander Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 So... Mig-23 comfirmed? :music_whistling: Nope. Not yet sadly ;)
sim_guy Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 LNS has just about week left to give us some news on future aircraft. Im sure we will all be surprised at their new stuff!
BlackLion213 Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 What gone be the Mig-23 campaign by Leatherneck?? F-14 with the Mig-23 as wingman against the Chinese F-16... Would that be so unrealistic? Excluding the part about a Chinese F-16 (unless you mean one of their indigenous aircraft that is similarly multi-role). Alliances these days have little relation to the past, plenty of Soviet equipped nations could be part of a coalition with NATO, Japan, India, or the US. Back in the 1980s, this scenario is highly doubtful. In the 2000s, perfectly plausible IMHO. -Nick
gavagai Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Given the only available theater is the Caucasus, I guess they could've gone for a classic 70's or early 80's Cold War gone hot scenario, like the Guardians of Caucasus user campaign. I love the Guardians of Caucasus campaign. The LNS campaign is too confusing (for me, at least) because both sides fly the Mig-21 with the same skin. P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria
pepin1234 Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) As I told you. The main controversial political issue is what they made. All the pictures you show there is Americans fighters flying together with soviet hardware right, is ok no problem there. But what about make a official campaigns of the epic Mig-21 as main playable flying with American wingmans and against the Russian Mig as AI at the other side and with offensives combat tactics (with AWACS) as in the 60's, and all that came direct from the developer. Then they make the classic briefing to discharge responsibilities... "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" So that's why they needed make a campaign briefing explaining a short sorry. I find more indirect political issues in what they made, than in what they could make with differents ideas. We don't need a new Russian project by a controversial side. Someone else can make a great Mig-23, with a less polemic campaign design as they made showing an unclear fear. We don't need see fear by the developer, this is absolutely unacceptable. PD: please see my picture above, explain better what is the main controversial issue. Edited November 21, 2015 by pepin1234 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Spectrum Legacy Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Since the campaign is purely fictional and I consider it as a bonus to the outright great module/plane, the premise is simple: You don't like it, you don't play it. I myself prefer historical/realistic scenarios too, and to be honest I'm yet to play the campaign itself, while the Fishbed was day1 purchase for me and actually it is the reason I joined DCS. Only speaking for myself here (no "We", no "Us" etc), the level of detail/fidelity/accuracy of the plane itself is what matters the most, along with good detailed manual included even in the beta, with training missions highly appreciated. Everything else is just icing on the cake, be they single player missions or campaign itself. I take it as a standalone product worth my while to learn it properly. There is also the mission editor / community content available, manual described how to set EWR scenario, so just because the campaign's premise is not to my linking, it doesn't detract from the modules quality imo. I'm pretty confident that we will see Mig-23 or even perhaps the 27 one day by LNS (one does not simply have enough of them Migs!), be it sooner or later, as the former shares a lot with the Fishbed and it was hinted in the past that 23 might be reserved for LNS because of that. We will see, but I have confidence in LNS to deliver top notch modules for us to enjoy as the standard is already pretty high... Sent from my pComputer using Keyboard
mjmorrow Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 I'm pretty confident that we will see Mig-23 or even perhaps the 27 one day by LNS (one does not simply have enough of them Migs!), be it sooner or later, as the former shares a lot with the Fishbed and it was hinted in the past that 23 might be reserved for LNS because of that. We will see, but I have confidence in LNS to deliver top notch modules for us to enjoy as the standard is already pretty high... When it comes to Mig's, I always thought that LNS would probably handle any potential Mig-23, given their background with the Mig-21bis, Belsimtek would handle a potential Mig-17F, given their background with the Mig-15bis, while ED would handle a potential Mig-29. I don't know if any of this will come true, but it all just seems to fit nicely. :thumbup: MJ [sIGPIC]http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv250/mjmorrow76/SPAD%20of%20a%20new%20generation_zpshcbftpce.png[/sIGPIC]
lokodehortaleza Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 We don't need a new Russian project by a controversial side. Someone else can make a great Mig-23, LNS made a great Mig-21. The module is excelent by any standards. You don't like the campaign? Too bad, but saying LNS shouldn't touch Russian planes because of that? Seriously?
Chimango Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 F-14 needs it's natural rival, let's get the 23 with good avionics! LN made the best DCS aircraft IMO which is the MiG-21; make them all! The 23; and also MiG-31! ;) 666GIAP_Chimanov - My Tomcat tribute video, type on youtube browser=> "DCS F-14 Tomcat Symphony"
ED Team NineLine Posted November 22, 2015 ED Team Posted November 22, 2015 (edited) Play nice guys, talk about the topic, leave the other stuff out... thanks Topic is if you want the MiG 23, nothing else. Edited November 22, 2015 by NineLine 1 Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**
dartuil Posted November 22, 2015 Posted November 22, 2015 (edited) I want it to fight M-2000C and M-F1 no matter who do it. A more modern radar and armament and Im in. Imagine the crazy dogfight between F1 and 23 in MP. Anyone got cockpit picture of a modern one? http://www.bobsyouruncle.net/DCWcockpits.htm Edited November 22, 2015 by dartuil i7 2600k -- Noctua NH-D14--Asrock Z75 Pro3--ASUS GTX970 Strix --16Go Ripjaws X 1333--Thermaltake Smart M650--CoolerMaster Silencio 652S--AOC E2752VQ-- Sandisk Extreme II 480GB--Saitek X-52 Pro --SAITEK PZ35 Pedals
Ce_Zeta Posted November 22, 2015 Posted November 22, 2015 (edited) BlackLion213, Yeaah, all the pictures you posted desmostrate that 2 aircrafts can fly in formation. But the real thing is, without proper equipment, they cannot operate in the same strike package. What's the diference between MiG-29A of the Luftstreitkräfte and MiG-29G of the Luftwaffe? Or between a Croatian MiG-21 BisD and a Romanian MiG-21 Bis (no Lancer)? NATO interoperability. Radios and IFF, VOR/TACAN in the technology side. Without a minimum equipment (and procedures) any non NATO aircraft cannot interoperate with NATO systems. Greek SAM S-300s operate outside NATO network for example. Nope. We suspected that ;) when we went deep in the Fishbed's avionics. If you check other modules, you will see that they are coding simulation modules. *Simulator= A software which imitates the operation of a real-world process or system over time. It's a matter of common sense. ;) Edited November 22, 2015 by Ce_Zeta 1 [sIGPIC]http://i.imgur.com/YexElgV.jpg[/sIGPIC]
Gargoil Posted November 22, 2015 Posted November 22, 2015 Mig-23 with a proper cold war scenario would be great. Iran - Iraq war would be a great campaign once the F-14 gets released
dartuil Posted November 22, 2015 Posted November 22, 2015 Why not a kind of mig-29 or su-27? i7 2600k -- Noctua NH-D14--Asrock Z75 Pro3--ASUS GTX970 Strix --16Go Ripjaws X 1333--Thermaltake Smart M650--CoolerMaster Silencio 652S--AOC E2752VQ-- Sandisk Extreme II 480GB--Saitek X-52 Pro --SAITEK PZ35 Pedals
pepin1234 Posted November 22, 2015 Posted November 22, 2015 (edited) BlackLion213, Yeaah, all the pictures you posted desmostrate that 2 aircrafts can fly in formation. But the real thing is, without proper equipment, they cannot operate in the same strike package. What's the diference between MiG-29A of the Luftstreitkräfte and MiG-29G of the Luftwaffe? Or between a Croatian MiG-21 BisD and a Romanian MiG-21 Bis (no Lancer)? NATO interoperability. Radios and IFF, VOR/TACAN in the technology side. Without a minimum equipment (and procedures) any non NATO aircraft cannot interoperate with NATO systems. Greek SAM S-300s operate outside NATO network for example. We suspected that ;) when we went deep in the Fishbed's avionics. If you check other modules, you will see that they are coding simulation modules. *Simulator= A software which imitates the operation of a real-world process or system over time. It's a matter of common sense. ;) +1 The Mig-23 have been retired from all the current ex Warsaw coalition countries. So here Leatherneck have a no way to do a current campaign against a fictitious coalition with Russia as enemy. Yes you are talking about a more compressive reason to avoid a offensive representation of the Soviet hardware made by a 3Th party creating officials campaign again a fictitious Russian coalition. - First the Soviet hardware from the 70's is that, from the 70's and that's it (Cold war era) - The avionic of a Mig-23 is not compatible with western hardware, as well the Mig-21bis version. - Ones again, the Mig-23 and Mig-21 never had taken part in a real conflict by European ex operators. Edited November 22, 2015 by pepin1234 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Brisse Posted November 22, 2015 Posted November 22, 2015 - Ones again, the Mig-23 and Mig-21 never had taken part of a real conflict by European ex operators. Yugoslavia and Croatia disagrees.
pepin1234 Posted November 22, 2015 Posted November 22, 2015 (edited) Yugoslavia and Croatia disagrees. Yes you right. Yougoslavia as European country with Croatia and Serbia as active Migs operator in a conflict. I just wanted to say ex-Warsaw pact countries Edited November 22, 2015 by pepin1234 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
vicx Posted November 22, 2015 Posted November 22, 2015 An F-14 module but only coming with an IRAF version and no provision for carrier ops. Would people expect the Mig-23 to be an export version or the best version. This is also relevant to the Mig-21 module. It is a great module but is it missing one of it's principal modes of operation. I use the example of the F-14 so that you see the parallels. It isn't technically wrong to do this ... but it is not what is expected. Many DCS modules receive updates ... perhaps it is just a matter of time.
Recommended Posts