Existing A10C Content Functionality Going Forward

[Radial9]

I have been reading with great interest the opinions of veteran Hog drivers of the new cockpit and the reading of the tea leaves of what is coming down the road for the A10C.

 

I have been seriously waffling back and forth between continuing with the A10C or turning my attention to the F18C and carrier ops.

 

Given I'm beginning to realsize becoming proficient with either is going to take years, I'm finding it a decision I am truly having a very hard time making.

 

Over the past two years I have accumulated all the A10C content from DCS with the intent to learn and enjoy it after I retire from a very demanding career this year. Got it all when the sales came by and it is just sitting there awaiting my attention.

 

Given all the discussions from both DCS and the community about all the changes coming to the A10C, which is GREAT news, will that already acquired content all work without endless forum research going forward?

 

The expected answers will go a good way to helping me make up my mind. Which I will do at some point, eventually, maybe... I never thought I would be so undecided and waffling back and forth over something like this. Something is telling me it is a very important decision going forward.

 

Thanks!!

[hansangb]

I have been reading with great interest the opinions of veteran Hog drivers of the new cockpit and the reading of the tea leaves of what is coming down the road for the A10C.

 

I have been seriously waffling back and forth between continuing with the A10C or turning my attention to the F18C and carrier ops.

 

Given I'm beginning to realsize becoming proficient with either is going to take years, I'm finding it a decision I am truly having a very hard time making.

 

Over the past two years I have accumulated all the A10C content from DCS with the intent to learn and enjoy it after I retire from a very demanding career this year. Got it all when the sales came by and it is just sitting there awaiting my attention.

 

Given all the discussions from both DCS and the community about all the changes coming to the A10C, which is GREAT news, will that already acquired content all work without endless forum research going forward?

 

The expected answers will go a good way to helping me make up my mind. Which I will do at some point, eventually, maybe... I never thought I would be so undecided and waffling back and forth over something like this. Something is telling me it is a very important decision going forward.

 

Thanks!!

 

 

I'm not sure if there will be any immediate impact since the change was just to the cockpit. I haven't tried any of the DLCs after the update. But there is A10C 2 that was announced. So if you decide to stay the A10 route, I don't think it's a dead end street as people design more DLCs suited to the new version 2 Warthawg. However, the DLC's for A10C version 1 will probably not work with version 2, I'm guessing. There were a lot of problems with DLC when the core engine of DCS changed. With upcoming changes to Vulkan API (from DirectX), I can't see how every old DLC will work going into the future.

 

And you can also play FA18 recreationally. There's no rule that says you have to take it to the n'th degree for every module.

Edited January 14, 2020 by hansangb

[Radial9]

I'm not sure if there will be any immediate impact since the change was just to the cockpit. I haven't tried any of the DLCs after the update. But there is A10C 2 that was announced. So if you decide to stay the A10 route, I don't think it's a dead end street as people design more DLCs suited to the new version 2 Warthawg. However, the DLC's for A10C version 1 will probably not work with version 2, I'm guessing. There were a lot of problems with DLC when the core engine of DCS changed. With upcoming changes to Vulkan API (from DirectX), I can't see how every old DLC will work going into the future.

 

And you can also play FA18 recreationally. There's no rule that says you have to take it to the n'th degree for every module.

 

Thank You! for taking a moment to respond. Very helpful!

 

I experienced some of the frustrations of being new to DCS and A10C at the same time and having to chase through forums to utilize the Maple Flag training missions. They did an excellent job, and I'm sure I'm going back to them. Much of the issues were simply out of their control and they can only pay so much attention to looking backwards if they want to keep the doors open. And... there is plenty of A10C support around here if needed, which is great!

 

After going back and forth for months trying to decide what rabbit hole to fall into first, the Hawg or the Hornet, I'm going for resume my study of the Hawg. I just know from other learning path experiences that whatever you "cut your teeth on" tends to influence, often to a great degree, your path going forward. I'll get around to carrier ops at some point. The Hawg manual is so well laid out and so full of useful info that crosses over to all DCS modules, it just seems the smart way to go.

[JEFX]

Hi Radial 9.

 

I felt compelled to share some thoughts with you after reading your initial post. I can see that you are somebody who does things thoroughly and it is great. But as hansangb pointed out, you dont have to 'play' all modules to the same depth... One could study (as you said and you are right about the A-10C manual, it is one of the best) one module in depth and play around with another for some time... I personally own about every module in DCS (excluding WWII stuff) and I have been playing it since LOMAC 2003! Even before that, the great manual and training missions that came with Falcon 4.0 was a fantastic source of study and deepening. But now I dont know all modules with the same depth and allow myself to wander from one to the other some time...

 

But it raises a deeper question of how we get to start studying a flight simulator and how we pursue it etc... it is totally different from one person to another but there is something attractive for some of us about the depth and fidelity of details, and that is why one would want to delve deeply in a module like you seem to be wanting. But the criteria for the choice are not so obvious.

 

For my part since I am somewhat of an maniacal person, after so many years of flying with a desk and a monitor I made the jump, took my Private Pilot License, earned my wings and bought myself a Cessna. Now you talk about studying... there is no comparison... so many hundred circuits and landings and multi hundred pages weather books, etc... But lets not forget that DCS is still a game and we should have fun!

 

I want to propose another point of view. We get very excited about new modules and if I go back to LOMAC I could never have dreamed of a fantastic Tomcat, a great Hornet and Viper and a multi-player Hind (coming) one day!!!! But there is one little caveat with these new modules (perhaps with the exception of the Tomcat): most of them come out in either early access or beta stage (look at Star Citizen which is even alpha stage...). That means that, take the Hornet or even worse, the Viper, the modules are not finished, new features get implemented every week, bugs come and go, the manual cannot be finished because the beast is in development, etc... All this is good for people who like to play with it and ride the evolution 'à mesure'... but if you want to sit down and take the whole module for granted as complete and the whole manual as a bible and you want to really study, I feel like it is much more satisfying to go back to modules that are finished! (that have great manuals, great training missions and lots of great campaigns to play!)

 

Recently I have had lots of fun with rediscovering the Mirage 2000 which got quite a lot of good updates (including great cockpit textures). Unfortunately some bugs were introduced in the armament aspects that puts off a lot of people, but yet, it is a great module, with fantastic training missions and campaigns and a great manual (all done by the best: Baltic Dragon). More improvements are coming and BD will issue an updated version of his great manual. I played his campaigns and they are quite immersive and that makes a big difference as opposed to flying aimlessly alone in the sky (unless you go the multiplayer path, which is also great, but I do appreciate a good thought out story with a scenario, a plot and voice overs, etc in a campaign).

 

For the same reasons, I think the A-10C is a much better time investment for you if you want to study one in depth for now because of the same reasons. The manual is certainly the best there is, the missions and campaigns done by Matt Wagner are great and there is even one of the best campaigns there is by Baltic Dragon (Ennemy within 3.0). We got a great cockpit texture uplift as a Christmas present (unexpected!) and once you know it really well and have played all the content, version 2.0 of the Hog will come out, so it is always in a completed state.

 

I have played a lot with the Hornet and it is great (and will be even better when finished) but I got tired of never having a finished product, so I put it aside and will deepen it in a year or two when all the content, manual and campaigns will be done! Same with the Viper. But that is just my own perception of course. But do have fun with other modules as well... Take the Mirage for example, it is great fun! It all comes down to one most capital concept: IMMERSION!

 

Anyways, good luck with your studying!!!

[hansangb]

Thank You! for taking a moment to respond. Very helpful!

 

I experienced some of the frustrations of being new to DCS and A10C at the same time and having to chase through forums to utilize the Maple Flag training missions. They did an excellent job, and I'm sure I'm going back to them. Much of the issues were simply out of their control and they can only pay so much attention to looking backwards if they want to keep the doors open. And... there is plenty of A10C support around here if needed, which is great!

 

After going back and forth for months trying to decide what rabbit hole to fall into first, the Hawg or the Hornet, I'm going for resume my study of the Hawg. I just know from other learning path experiences that whatever you "cut your teeth on" tends to influence, often to a great degree, your path going forward. I'll get around to carrier ops at some point. The Hawg manual is so well laid out and so full of useful info that crosses over to all DCS modules, it just seems the smart way to go.

 

 

If you haven't already, check out Bunyap's Down the Range series on YouTube. Go to the playlist and you'll see the A10C specific tutorials. They are excellent. Also, if you haven't tried VR, it'll change your DCS life.

[Radial9]

Hi Radial 9.

 

I felt compelled to share some thoughts with you after reading your initial post. I can see that you are somebody who does things thoroughly and it is great. But as hansangb pointed out, you dont have to 'play' all modules to the same depth... One could study (as you said and you are right about the A-10C manual, it is one of the best) one module in depth and play around with another for some time... I personally own about every module in DCS (excluding WWII stuff) and I have been playing it since LOMAC 2003! Even before that, the great manual and training missions that came with Falcon 4.0 was a fantastic source of study and deepening. But now I dont know all modules with the same depth and allow myself to wander from one to the other some time...

 

But it raises a deeper question of how we get to start studying a flight simulator and how we pursue it etc... it is totally different from one person to another but there is something attractive for some of us about the depth and fidelity of details, and that is why one would want to delve deeply in a module like you seem to be wanting. But the criteria for the choice are not so obvious.

 

For my part since I am somewhat of an maniacal person, after so many years of flying with a desk and a monitor I made the jump, took my Private Pilot License, earned my wings and bought myself a Cessna. Now you talk about studying... there is no comparison... so many hundred circuits and landings and multi hundred pages weather books, etc... But lets not forget that DCS is still a game and we should have fun!

 

I want to propose another point of view. We get very excited about new modules and if I go back to LOMAC I could never have dreamed of a fantastic Tomcat, a great Hornet and Viper and a multi-player Hind (coming) one day!!!! But there is one little caveat with these new modules (perhaps with the exception of the Tomcat): most of them come out in either early access or beta stage (look at Star Citizen which is even alpha stage...). That means that, take the Hornet or even worse, the Viper, the modules are not finished, new features get implemented every week, bugs come and go, the manual cannot be finished because the beast is in development, etc... All this is good for people who like to play with it and ride the evolution 'à mesure'... but if you want to sit down and take the whole module for granted as complete and the whole manual as a bible and you want to really study, I feel like it is much more satisfying to go back to modules that are finished! (that have great manuals, great training missions and lots of great campaigns to play!)

 

Recently I have had lots of fun with rediscovering the Mirage 2000 which got quite a lot of good updates (including great cockpit textures). Unfortunately some bugs were introduced in the armament aspects that puts off a lot of people, but yet, it is a great module, with fantastic training missions and campaigns and a great manual (all done by the best: Baltic Dragon). More improvements are coming and BD will issue an updated version of his great manual. I played his campaigns and they are quite immersive and that makes a big difference as opposed to flying aimlessly alone in the sky (unless you go the multiplayer path, which is also great, but I do appreciate a good thought out story with a scenario, a plot and voice overs, etc in a campaign).

 

For the same reasons, I think the A-10C is a much better time investment for you if you want to study one in depth for now because of the same reasons. The manual is certainly the best there is, the missions and campaigns done by Matt Wagner are great and there is even one of the best campaigns there is by Baltic Dragon (Ennemy within 3.0). We got a great cockpit texture uplift as a Christmas present (unexpected!) and once you know it really well and have played all the content, version 2.0 of the Hog will come out, so it is always in a completed state.

 

I have played a lot with the Hornet and it is great (and will be even better when finished) but I got tired of never having a finished product, so I put it aside and will deepen it in a year or two when all the content, manual and campaigns will be done! Same with the Viper. But that is just my own perception of course. But do have fun with other modules as well... Take the Mirage for example, it is great fun! It all comes down to one most capital concept: IMMERSION!

 

Anyways, good luck with your studying!!!

 

Thank you for taking the time to answer in such detail. It is truly appreciated. Your well spoken thoughts confirm my thinking and make me more comfortable with my decision to fall down the A10C rabbit hole over the F18C's. I truly went back and forth and back and forth again and back and forth yet again the past few months.

 

I did my RL solo in May of 1990 at PAJN. Lived near there most my life. Owned a Stinson 108 Voyager taildragger for a bit then a small Cessna. Have not flown a real aircraft in over 15 years. To give you an idea of my spending time with one aircraft flightsimming, I have over 2K hours logged flying the DC3 with DC3 Airways. Great bunch of guys.

 

Thanks again for your thoughtful response. I may PM you and draw on your experience if I can’t get through something by RTFM if that’s OK.

 

 

Hansangb... Thanks! I do have those resources set aside. Need to learn to fly before blowing stuff up! I also want to set up the 476th NTTR range. It's on the short list.