Never had so much fun!

[zerO_crash]

Ho, ok... sorry... my mistake, all is about "realism"... that's true.

 

Please don´t be, I`m not trying to correct you, rather make sure that we are wishing for the same, or not?:)

[sedenion]

Please don´t be, I`m not trying to correct you, rather make sure that we are wishing for the same, or not?:)

 

I just have other religious beleifes, i beleive DCS is a game, i am an heretic. And you know, belief is hard to debate.

[zerO_crash]

I just have other religious beleifes, i beleive DCS is a game, i am an heretic. And you know, belief is hard to debate.

 

Hehehe, all fine mate :lol::thumbup:

[3rd Wing - Raiden]

Unfortunately, the software's name is DCS and not DCG (troll inside sorry).

 

There is plenty of other softwares (with planes in it) that make "balanced gameplay" a major feature.

 

But as you said, it's all a matter of belief.

[sedenion]

To be less cynical...

 

The fact is that when you follow some "balance" rules between weapon efficiency/count, you make the game more interesting by allowing some manoeuvers, close combats, introducing the decisive question about how to prevent wasting your weapons... Much more interesting things than "target lock, missile launch, Boom!, RTB". And i don't care if this is more realistic or not, because to me, DCS is just a game based on some real facts... maybe some need to beleiv they actualy act according some realistic rules to make theire life better, this is not my case.

Edited July 4, 2016 by sedenion

[Azrayen]

But I´m still surprised that you get to operate radar in CCM when having Super 530D selected. That is contradicting the manual... Page 100. " Choosing the Super 530Ds while in CCM mode will disconnect the mode and revert to normal RWS mode" Weird...

Then manual needs to be updated to. It's part of the module, so it's also WIP ;)

[3rd Wing - Raiden]

To be less cynical...

 

The fact is that when you follow some "balance" rules between weapon efficiency/count, you make the game more interesting by allowing some manoeuvers, close combats, introducing the decisive question about how to prevent wasting your weapons... Much more interesting things than "target lock, missile launch, Boom!, RTB". And i don't care if this is more realistic or not, because to me, DCS is just a game based on some real facts... maybe some need to beleiv they actualy act according some realistic rules to make theire life better, this is not my case.

 

My apologies for my cynical comment. Here is a more elaborated comment:

 

I totally get what you mean. I think your point of view is biaised by the fact that you only play on public servers, where there is no rules other than take off, spamraam a few targets, get killed and start over.

 

I am not trying to judge but open servers looks like Call of Duty servers to me.

 

When you play private missions, with limited ROE, limited weapons, limited respawn rules, with a real scenario, a mission objective, your flight objective (which can diverge from the mission objective, or can only be there for anotehr flight to complete its mission) you get in a totally different world where "the game is more interesting by allowing some manoeuvers, close combats, introducing the decisive question about how to prevent wasting your weapons... Much more interesting things than "target lock, missile launch, Boom!, RTB"."

 

And this is even better when the "game is not balanced" because you have an aircraft with limited capabilities and you have to deal with it. You got friends to help you over, you got human control to get you out of this ambush you didn't see coming, etc.

 

With balanced gameplay, the "game" would be flat, boring and tasteless.

 

Now ED decided to build a simulator, that means : do it as close to the real thing as possible. It's the editor's choice and 3rd parties tend to follow this path.

 

The real deal here is what do I need to play casual? What do I need to play hardcore? I think the answer lays in the hands of the mission maker.

 

What did you say about belief, it's hard to debate.

[gavagai]

I think the master problem of FC3 gameplay is not so much the radar efficiency...

 

The FC3 radar is part of it. In the Mirage I get locked up by Su-27s and F-15s when I'm on the taxiway!:doh:

 

A) It's not about "balance", it's about as realistic approach to a battlefield as possible (if possible, historically correct)

 

The most popular server has mixed lineups (F-15 vs F-15; Su-27 vs Su-27) and 80% of the aircraft flying are 4th gen fighters.:smilewink:

[bkthunder]

LOL! All you guys are saying that the missiles in DCS are too efficient?? I have the absolute opposite opinion. I am/was pissed off at how the missiles are "stupid" and loose track too easily etc.

I play a lot of BMS and the BVR combat there is a whole lot different than in DCS. I suppose more realistic since they've been patching it over for 18 years and done some very hardcore research and educated assumptions...

 

On the servers every A-A engagement looks like Quake 3: a bunch of guys going around valleys and trying to sneak out at the right moment, spamming a few missiles. I can't imagine that happening with modern aircraft (on both sides), but it's like DCS just "drives you" to fly like that.

I guess it's down to the mission / people playing as well, but surely there's a factor of how the missiles / radars are modelled.

[sedenion]

I think your point of view is biaised by the fact that you only play on public servers

 

I fact i just don't play online anymore...

 

where there is no rules other than take off, spamraam a few targets, get killed and start over. I am not trying to judge but open servers looks like Call of Duty servers to me.

 

This kind of rules can be very fun if we exclude all BVR missiles and strictly limit missile count by aircraft... anyway, for a public server where players enter and leave randomly, you cannot make a mission based on great scenario, you must focus on "instant action"... then the fact is that (as far as i know) even current public servers have very bad calibrated missions for this kind of server (players enter and leave randomly), all trying to make some complex mission with some scenario and/or the full payload of R-77/R-27E*/AIM-120, which is a non-sens in the context.

 

This is why i don't play online anymore... No suitable mission, not even any good "Call Of Duty" style gameplay.

 

When you play private missions, with limited ROE, limited weapons, limited respawn rules, with a real scenario, a mission objective, your flight objective (which can diverge from the mission objective, or can only be there for anotehr flight to complete its mission)

 

This kind of play is too "World Of Warcraft" for me... this is why i'm not in any "squadron" or "guild" and never play with other "Hardcore Simers"...

 

And this is even better when the "game is not balanced" because you have an aircraft with limited capabilities and you have to deal with it. You got friends to help you over, you got human control to get you out of this ambush you didn't see coming, etc.

 

That is called "progressive difficulty", that is a part of good gameplay.

 

With balanced gameplay, the "game" would be flat, boring and tasteless.

 

Depending what you seek for... usually you begin with some simplest thing, to have a minimum satisfaction before throwing your joystick by the window.

 

Now ED decided to build a simulator, that means : do it as close to the real thing as possible. It's the editor's choice and 3rd parties tend to follow this path.

 

The technical part is realistic (and can be simplified, by user choice), the "gameplay" is modulated by the mission. We are not forced to make a super-realistic mission according the holy rules of realism... and maybe get fun anyway.

 

The real deal here is what do I need to play casual? What do I need to play hardcore? I think the answer lays in the hands of the mission maker.

 

exactly !

Edited July 4, 2016 by sedenion