What Happened To The Study Sims ?

[DieHard]

Are the last 3 pages of this thread some sort of elaborate, late April Fool's day prank ?

 

Mower conceding that FC3 is a 'survey' sim not an arcade game, then showing more grace than I would as everyone continues to bag him for something he's already taken back ?

 

I never sat down to learn everything about the Su-33/Su-27 until this past week. I only played with it a few years ago to do some CV traps. It is definitely a study sim. But learning the Black Shark was a much larger effort, and I am still learning sim flying that thing.

[Steel Jaw]

Do you have TacPack?

 

See VCVW-8, VCVW-3, VCVW-2, and FSXCarrierOps.com

 

I am not impressed with FSX@War

 

-+-

Some guys to DCS MP go to great lengths to make interesting war maps

 

Yes to all of the above, I have flown the VRS TP RHino online extensively with FSXCVOps and VCW8. I also know Wood from VCW3.

 

FSX@War is not out yet, too early to know.

[Lizzard]

I really like FC3...it`s somehow easy listening..get in the pit a fly.. It was beside BS2 the first Module i purchased..but that was more because of LOMAC nostalgia...but nowadays..if I want a break from Switches, Buttons and Avionics..I take a ride in my beloved SU27

[CheckGear]

I am late to this discussion, but if FC3 is a "survey" sim, then it is the closest thing we have to a "study-survey" sim. The amount of detail in each flyable aircraft is actually quite astounding, something that goes beyond simply showing what makes each aircraft stand out.

[GGTharos]

The avionics gap matters only in very specific cases when it comes to BVR. You could say in some respects it makes FC inferior, I'd say it just makes BVR under-modeled. But again, similar tactics used in both sims work, and frankly, most people in EITHER sim wouldn't know a tactic if it hit them in the face. With a slammer. Or an alamo. Avionics N/A. But yes, they facilitate very specific changes in tactics.

 

That said, those tactics rely more on automation and datalinks than you flicking switches, so as long as FC simulated those automations, the difference would effectively be next to nil.

 

Given the drastic gap in avionics, I though he meant it seriously. It sounded like he was saying that there was a group of people who operated FC3 at a different level than him.

[Steel Jaw]

Once/if FC gets the right treatment of missiles and certain avionics, it'll be on par and the only thing missing will be some switchology.

 

Long time ago, on the UBI boards in the LOMAC section a poster there always said Falcon was all about "switchology for switchology's sake".

 

But that misses the point entirely.

 

That switchology increases the (v) pilot's workload substantially and helps fill that bucket so that task saturation becomes a very real possibly That's just not gonna happen in LOMAC nor FC3, nor any survey sim IMHO.

 

But the DCS A10C does in fine fashion.

Edited April 4, 2014 by Mower

[Frostie]

That switchology increases the (v) pilot's workload substantially and helps fill that bucket so that task saturation becomes a very real possibly That's just not gonna happen in LOMAC nor FC3, nor any survey sim IMHO.

Totally agree with you from a multirole perspective but for purely A2A you shouldn't flicking switches up and down in the middle of combat, that is what the HOTAS was designed for. Falcon brings more cards to the table such as a comprehensive datalink system but doesn't add anymore workload in an engagement, the process and tactics are the same.

[Steel Jaw]

Err, what was the topic again...?

 

Ah yes, well you see we are debating the definition of "study sim" so we can then ask what happened to them...?

 

Frankly, if the DCS Hornet C was out, even in beta, right now Id be flying that and wouldnt even be in this thread. I was having this debate in 2001 on the UBI forums and F4HQ etc.

 

I am not out to disparage anyone. Just trying to define.

Edited April 4, 2014 by Mower

[Steel Jaw]

Right now you have enough switchology in FC to bend your mind

 

No I don't.

 

You giys are on about the A2A, by that I assume you the close in knife fight end game where you dont have time for anything other survival?

 

Fine.

 

But what about target sorting at BVR and planning/executing the intercept? Cant ignore the avionics management then.

[Frostie]

I agree, I don't think you should be belittled at all. But you are doing some gliding around people. I will tell you that there are almost certainly people who fly the A-10C, but secretly, think that people who fly FC3 are a joke. Not me. But likely some of them.

Children will be children but in all honesty some of those guys probably don't even know how to fly the A-10C properly and either panic crash or get shot down as soon as a MiG gets within 40nm of them, and then moan about arcade.

[GGTharos]

No I don't.

 

You giys are on about the A2A, by that I assume you the close in knife fight end game where you dont have time for anything other survival?

 

Nope.

 

Fine.

 

But what about target sorting at BVR and planning/executing the intercept? Cant ignore the avionics management then.

We do all that, and frankly I don't understand your objection. Sorting isn't about avionics, it is about having every bandit in FBR targeted/assigned. What we have is a lack of capability to easily designate closely spaced targets, but other than that, we're not exactly missing anything to do the rest.

 

If you want to complain about lack of data-link, yep, things change. If you want to complain about bullseye, yep, but you should be doing it in your head anyway.

 

So, I'm just curious to understand what you believe is missing in terms of avionics. I have missing capability, but switchology isn't an issue even if I did have it. I'm not going to be switching modes when I don't need to, and there are plenty of things the radar can do that I don't to touch a lot of the time anyway.

[karambiatos]

Ive bound almost everything in the ka-50 to my keyboard, and barely ever touch the switches anything with my mouse, apart from start up. OH NO!!!

 

I have sadly become a dirty Flaming cliffs peasant.

 

the only good thing about switches it eases the learning curve.

[Groove]

Please, no <THAT SIM> vs <THAT SIM> "Discusscion".

 

Thanks

[Steel Jaw]

Please, no <THAT SIM> vs <THAT SIM> "Discusscion".

 

Thanks

 

Yes, I would much rather hear about how the DCS F/A-18C is progressing.

[EtherealN]

Yes, I would much rather hear about how the DCS F/A-18C is progressing.

 

In due time.

 

Not the topic here either, though. ;) Keep your eye on the news thread and press releases. :)