Leatherneck new facebook image/picture

[King_Hrothgar]

That doesn't address the core problem xaoslaad. And we already have a first (P-51D), a second (Fw-190D) and a third (Bf-109K) without any movement at all on the supporting AI units. Adding more flyable planes isn't going to fix that and neither is that silly little script. You can't script in a formation of AI B-17's. You can't script in the USS Hornet. You can't script in an SBD dive bomber. You can't script in a B5N dropping an aerial torpedo. So I'll say it again, until there is a WW2 pack of some sort that includes a whole bunch of AI units, there is absolutely no point in adding any further WW2 flyables. And I'm not even so picky as to say we need something other than the Caucasus map. That map looks close enough to New Guinea for me. So I'm not exactly nitpicking here.

[NineLine]

Units are in the plans from ED, I would like to see more AI type stuff come with 3rd Party modules as well though...

[xaoslaad]

That doesn't address the core problem xaoslaad. And we already have a first (P-51D), a second (Fw-190D) and a third (Bf-109K) without any movement at all on the supporting AI units. Adding more flyable planes isn't going to fix that and neither is that silly little script. You can't script in a formation of AI B-17's. You can't script in the USS Hornet. You can't script in an SBD dive bomber. You can't script in a B5N dropping an aerial torpedo. So I'll say it again, until there is a WW2 pack of some sort that includes a whole bunch of AI units, there is absolutely no point in adding any further WW2 flyables. And I'm not even so picky as to say we need something other than the Caucasus map. That map looks close enough to New Guinea for me. So I'm not exactly nitpicking here.

 

Hardly silly or little, a couple of community members worked hard on it and revised it several times. Perhaps not be so insulting to them (I am not one of them and have no relation) without even looking at or implementing it?

 

The AI units are coming with the maps, right? OK, so at this very minute you can't have every bleeding scenario imagined under the sun. Who cares? If you can't look the other way on the things you have to do to get a reasonable approximation of a WWII scenario as a temporary solution, full well knowing it's all coming down the road, then you should stop complaining and come back when it's done to your high standards.

 

Screaming now now now doesn't change the fact RRG dropped the ball and ED had their plans plus now RRG's plans on their plate. They're busy. Sure I wanted EDGE end of December, Normandy like yesterday, etc., etc. My wants are still tempered with the reality that they have much work on their plate and a lot of the delay isn't their fault in the least little bit. And third parties can't release maps until Edge is here, so screaming at them to make maps hardly makes sense at the moment.

 

When Normandy and a Pacific map do come I will happily convert any missions I do have over to whichever is appropriate. Until then I am fine with doing what I can to make it close enough to be reasonable.

[King_Hrothgar]

You read far too much into that mate. My point was DCS is not a WW2 sim. It doesn't have the AI units for it or the business model to foster their creation. This is how I see it, LNS can make three planes. These can be the F-14 + F4U + A6M or they can be the F-14 + MiG-23 + MiG-27. The reason for the latter two is because they are so closely related, thus shortening development time. Now look at DCS as it sits today. Can the F-14 fight the majority of existing DCS planes (both player and AI) as well as the ground units in it? Yes. Can the MiG-23 do that? Yes. Can the MiG-27? Yes. Can the F4U? Absolutely not. Can the A6M? Not a chance. If we extend the timeline out 2 years, is this situation likely to change? No. How about 4 years? Still no.

 

Do you understand my misgivings about doing WW2 planes now even though I love them?

[Random]

Too much negativity here lately :(

[NineLine]

Lately lol... we need a live stream from Rudel with his music to cheer us all up :)

[fltsimbuff]

The Japanese plane could be anything from a Zero to one of these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yokosuka_MXY7_Ohka

 

The latter would fit perfectly with my tunnel-vision attack style.

[mattebubben]

You read far too much into that mate. My point was DCS is not a WW2 sim. It doesn't have the AI units for it or the business model to foster their creation. This is how I see it, LNS can make three planes. These can be the F-14 + F4U + A6M or they can be the F-14 + MiG-23 + MiG-27. The reason for the latter two is because they are so closely related, thus shortening development time. Now look at DCS as it sits today. Can the F-14 fight the majority of existing DCS planes (both player and AI) as well as the ground units in it? Yes. Can the MiG-23 do that? Yes. Can the MiG-27? Yes. Can the F4U? Absolutely not. Can the A6M? Not a chance. If we extend the timeline out 2 years, is this situation likely to change? No. How about 4 years? Still no.

 

Do you understand my misgivings about doing WW2 planes now even though I love them?

I agree and that is also why i wish for modern/Semi Modern Jets.

Like the F-14 Mig23,Mig27,Su17/22 etc.

 

I also love ww2 aircraft but as it is there is a huge lack of surrounding content for a ww2 aircraft to be as "complete" as a modern aircraft is.

[KesMonkey]

My point was DCS is not a WW2 sim.

 

We already have 3 WWII era aircraft modules, with many more incoming.

 

VEAO are currently working on a Spitfire, a Bearcat, a Warhawk, a Buchon, and a Meteor. VEAO also have plans for a Wildcat, a Typhoon, a Mosquito, an Me109, a Seafire, a Hurricane, a Hawk, a Sea Hawk, and a few more. They are also currently in discussions to develop a Lancaster and a Dakota.

 

Additionally, there's a Normandy map on the way, and VEAO are to develop a North Africa map.

 

DCSW may not currently be a WW2 flight sim, but it soon(ish) will be.

 

That anyone who claims to love WWII era aircraft would object to the continued development of WWII aircraft modules boggles my mind in the extreme. :huh:

[Zilch]

The Japanese plane could be anything from a Zero to one of these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yokosuka_MXY7_Ohka

 

The latter would fit perfectly with my tunnel-vision attack style.

 

HA!

 

You know, if you live near the Washington, DC area, a trip to the Museum of the Marine Corps may be worth your while.

 

They have one of these rocket powered, human-guided bombs hanging from the ceiling. I was amazed that anyone had one these days.

[King_Hrothgar]

We already have 3 WWII era aircraft modules, with many more incoming.

 

VEAO are currently working on a Spitfire, a Bearcat, a Warhawk, a Buchon, and a Meteor. VEAO also have plans for a Wildcat, a Typhoon, a Mosquito, an Me109, a Seafire, a Hurricane, a Hawk, a Sea Hawk, and a few more. They are also currently in discussions to develop a Lancaster and a Dakota.

 

Additionally, there's a Normandy map on the way, and VEAO are to develop a North Africa map.

 

DCSW may not currently be a WW2 flight sim, but it soon(ish) will be.

 

That anyone who claims to love WWII era aircraft would object to the continued development of WWII aircraft modules boggles my mind in the extreme. :huh:

 

Read the rest of my post rather than just the first sentence. It explains how I arrived at my position. But the short version is this: a random collection of WW2 fighters does not make a WW2 combat flight sim. I have nothing further to say on the matter. I just hope LNS sticks with jets.

[vicx]

DCS is a simulator sandbox.

 

As has been stated repeatedly by some of the more insightful commenters. Whether DCS is a WW2 simulator or a simulator from another era or a complete departure from period simulation is entirely up to the mission designer.

 

However I would add to this and say that even with the right aircraft and the right mission the participants in the missions do have to play their part. Yes you have to play DCS like a role playing game if you want it to be a SIM.

 

The aircraft are amazing achievements but they are just a tool to be used by the mission designers and after that by the players. If you want a a WW2 sim you need the aircraft, the mission and the mission actors to stay in character. It really becomes what you make it.

[rjetster1]

This is silly... just tell us what it is? :)

[Random]

Read the rest of my post rather than just the first sentence. It explains how I arrived at my position. But the short version is this: a random collection of WW2 fighters does not make a WW2 combat flight sim. I have nothing further to say on the matter. I just hope LNS sticks with jets.

 

And I bet you'd be unhappy if the various devs released WW2 era maps and units without a range of WW2 player aircraft to use....

 

Be patient and wait for the maps and units.

[Flagrum]

This is silly... just tell us what it is? :)

This!

[OnlyforDCS]

It's not silly. Leatherneck don't want to announce any project without having at least something worth showing to the community. Cobra himself pretty much even said so in the January newsletter. They want to show us something more concrete. Also when I say community I mean the entire community, not just those of us who regularly visit the forums. It's smart marketing pure and simple. You don't build hype by releasing a statement "We are making the F14", you build hype by releasing a statement AND maybe some detailed specs of the variant used, some screenshots or maybe even a tiny video of the early build in action.

 

There could also be licensing or security issues that might need to be negotiated or ironed out with Grumman, which might even affect which variant we will be getting.

 

This is all of course pure speculation, so feel free to ignore it but I dont think its far off the mark to say that LN have a very good reason for staying quiet, at least at this time. (We can't be privy to every little tidbit of information no matter how much we want to be and that by itself might be a good thing :thumbup:)

Edited February 4, 2015 by OnlyforDCS

[FWind]

so......................NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1A or NAVAIR 01-F14AAA-1A

[Kroll]

This is silly... just tell us what it is? :)

 

I agree. This was funny at first. It's now been over played. Show us a wheel or landing gear............something. I thought we were going to see something a month ago. Oh well. I will still buy it because the Mig-21 was so good.

 

Let the "Cat" out of the bag already.

[EngineerFalcon]

Somehow I'm not sure if it is an F-14 silhouette in the middle. I could be wrong, but that "dent" in the left wing tells me that it is a MiG-23, which has a similar "dent" at max sweep unlike the Tomcat.

 

The 23 has very similar systems and instruments to the 21's, so I'd assume it would take less work than building an American cockpit from scratch.

[T_A]

Somehow I'm not sure if it is an F-14 silhouette in the middle.

 

In the words of queen Elsa - "let it go" , its the f-14

 

And this really is becoming silly LN, just release the info already.

[rjetster1]

It's not silly. Leatherneck don't want to announce any project without having at least something worth showing to the community. Cobra himself pretty much even said so in the January newsletter. They want to show us something more concrete. Also when I say community I mean the entire community, not just those of us who regularly visit the forums. It's smart marketing pure and simple. You don't build hype by releasing a statement "We are making the F14", you build hype by releasing a statement AND maybe some detailed specs of the variant used, some screenshots or maybe even a tiny video of the early build in action.

 

There could also be licensing or security issues that might need to be negotiated or ironed out with Grumman, which might even affect which variant we will be getting.

 

This is all of course pure speculation, so feel free to ignore it but I dont think its far off the mark to say that LN have a very good reason for staying quiet, at least at this time. (We can't be privy to every little tidbit of information no matter how much we want to be and that by itself might be a good thing :thumbup:)

 

Sure, LN can do whatever they want… it’s their company. I don’t buy into the hype marketing theory to announce a project, rather if you know what it is, tease for a few weeks, announce it and rely on momentum. I do not think they would be teasing if licensing or security details still needed to be negotiated. :)

[badaboom]

Am I the only guy here who is overjoyed to have such quality simulations of aircraft in the sim, if only just to enjoy learning how to takeoff/route/land/maneuver with them all alone? That's enough for me, the combat stuff is just a bonus lol.

 

Bring on the orphan aircraft!

 

:thumbup:Bingo!!!!

[rjetster1]

+1

[Jerkzilla]

Somehow I'm not sure if it is an F-14 silhouette in the middle. I could be wrong, but that "dent" in the left wing tells me that it is a MiG-23, which has a similar "dent" at max sweep unlike the Tomcat.

 

The 23 has very similar systems and instruments to the 21's, so I'd assume it would take less work than building an American cockpit from scratch.

 

Judging solely by overall proportions, it's more likely an F-14. The point where the wing starts (the shoulder or whatever it's called) seems too far forward to be a Mig. Not that I really care, I'd buy both almost equally fast.

[King_Hrothgar]

I can see the resemblance of either and I sincerely hope we get both. Those I'd buy and though I wouldn't spend much time in the tomcat, I'd love to try to flog a few of them. :D