Early acces?

[Slippery Pete]

On 6/2/2021 at 12:33 AM, cfrag said:

 

I wish people would stop trotting out this tired argument: "it can't be made because it is secret". It's a convenient "excuse", I agree. But it's not something that would ever stop ED from producing a good game. Case in point: for the next version (3) of the Ka-50, ED simply makes up some of the central avionics out of thin air. So what? It's a game, and as long as it's fun, I applaud them and will certainly purchase that model as well. Please retire the argument that 'it's secret and therefore ED can't make that module'. They can and do make stuff up to create a good product. And by 'good' I mean a product that meets their goal (sales) and ours (being entertained). A module isn't bad because it uses some fantasy tech. A module is bad when it destroys the balance of the rest of the game. And keeping the balance while remaining mostly with the limits of the real word (immortality, instant repairs and other essential game elements notwithstanding) is what ED do exceedingly well. But breaking realism never was, and should never be, a deal-breaker for new modules. So let's not pretend it would.

 

 

No two versions of the Ka-50 in real life are even the same and it was never mass produced, it's much more realistic for ED to add something to a 2015+ model of it that it would have had in real life if the Russian military wasn't in complete shambles. The AH-64D is also being worked on by actual AH-64D pilots and crew members, and there's tons more data of it available to make an accurate simulation of.  There's always going to be more data available to model US aircraft then Russian.   You're comparing apples and oranges, in addition to advocating for less realistic modeling of aircraft just for the sake of 'fun'.  If ED has to make an older module of a Russian aircraft because that's the most information they're going to have access to, then that's the model they should make, every time.  

[huchanronaa]

I read the official development report of AH-64D on June 4th and some pictures. I feel that the development of the AH-64D model has not been able to fly in the air so far, and the speed is much slower than expected. In addition, the official development report mentions that it is abnormal. Complex structure and cockpit, so it seems that this year can not have too much expectations for it
In contrast, MI-24P is developing smoothly, maybe it will be officially released this month

[cfrag]

On 6/6/2021 at 4:40 AM, Slippery Pete said:

 

You're comparing apples and oranges, in addition to advocating for less realistic modeling of aircraft just for the sake of 'fun'.  If ED has to make an older module of a Russian aircraft because that's the most information they're going to have access to, then that's the model they should make, every time.  

 

I'm merely stating the obvious that ED does use artistic license to make a better game, and that complete adherence to reality does not make a better game. Look at it this way: if you crashed your plane, would you find it more fun if you had to re-purchase that model? It would be more realistic. We both don't want that, that would not be fun even though it would be MUCH more realistic. We are willingly overlooking a gigantic gap in realism already. Let's not cherry-pick our arguments but focus on the overall package. And let's always keep in mind that we are talking about a game here - I have the uneasy feeling that a part of this community doesn't like to be reminded of the fact that we are playing a game, which - by extension - makes me worry that they take their hobby a bit too seriously. I love the realism in DCS, but realism for realism's sake (as in the 'pay for crashed planes' example) is seldom wise. Success often lies in moderation, and so far ED have shown excellent judgement when they ignore reality.

 

As for which models ED should make, the answer to that question is very simple: it's what they can sell so their business remains successful. What they can sell is dictated exclusively by the market, i.e. people like you and I. Since we like realism, it's natural for ED to prioritize realism over fantasy. But if fantasy tech is required in some aspects to bring a product to marked, I - for my part - don't mind too much and purchase that product fully knowing that it's not entirely accurate. I don't mind inaccuracies when it makes for a better gaming experience. As long as ED's products keep in mind that the experience this particular market segment values second most in their games is technical accuracy - after being entertained. 

 

Edited June 7, 2021 by cfrag

[WinterH]

47 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I'm merely stating the obvious that ED does use artistic license to make a better game, and that complete adherence to reality does not make a better game.

You're in the wrong game /thread

[Fri13]

On 6/6/2021 at 5:40 AM, Slippery Pete said:

No two versions of the Ka-50 in real life are even the same and it was never mass produced, it's much more realistic for ED to add something to a 2015+ model of it that it would have had in real life if the Russian military wasn't in complete shambles. 

 

The KA-50 went through at least two serial production standards, one was just before combat trials and there were few updated to same standard. And then after that, those units went to testing where based to feedback the new serial production standard was made. It was the Ministry of Defense that ordered new standard for production but funding was never really given even when issued.

 

F-16 is very heavily modified as well, as one ground crew chief here said that you can have airbase without another identical F-16 there as each has something unique in them (software or hardware wise) even when being in same update program. 

 

How much differences there are between Apache fleet?

Based to manufacturer and government upgrade programs and funding there are variants with major differences.

So even there there are situation that multiple differences exist at the same time. 

[thermalguy]

I agree that ED has to 100% use some artistic license, in the real world we have to deal with fleet groundings, AOG and many other things you do not see here. You just select a plane and it starts up every time, that is not real world at all. But what kind of simulation would it be if you got in your cockpit and 25% of the time you had to shut down and 15% of the time you had to wait 2 hours for ground crew to perform a task, or even better yet 18% of the time you are 30 minutes out on a mission and a warning light comes on and you have to RTB. No one would want that realism in a simulation unless you are the actual apache pilot using a simulator to practice emergency procedures.

 

Skim over "ARL-TR-1172" an old doc on Apache readiness just to get an idea of what is involved. You will be amazed at the complexity of keeping these birds in the air.

[ChuckJäger]

On 6/7/2021 at 7:38 AM, thermalguy said:

I agree that ED has to 100% use some artistic license, in the real world we have to deal with fleet groundings, AOG and many other things you do not see here. You just select a plane and it starts up every time, that is not real world at all. But what kind of simulation would it be if you got in your cockpit and 25% of the time you had to shut down and 15% of the time you had to wait 2 hours for ground crew to perform a task, or even better yet 18% of the time you are 30 minutes out on a mission and a warning light comes on and you have to RTB. No one would want that realism in a simulation unless you are the actual apache pilot using a simulator to practice emergency procedures.

 

Skim over "ARL-TR-1172" an old doc on Apache readiness just to get an idea of what is involved. You will be amazed at the complexity of keeping these birds in the air.

Those are some pretty dreadful reliability numbers.  We would have been in some deep trouble if we had that kind of dispatch reliability when I was in

[DaemonPhobos]

I think you guys are starting to take it too seriously, it's not necessary that the aircraft gets to the level you have to sign virtual DA-forms, prepare aircraft performance planning cards and perform exterior inspections.

We have to be reasonable in our goals, the info required to operate the aircraft is mostly contained on the TM and multiple documents scattered around the internet.

There is some solid info explaining weapon and aircraft performance too.

As long as the aircraft is compliant with the real procedures listed at the manuals and it has an overall accurate avionics display, there is no reason to be worried about it.

Not even the military sims are 100% accurate avionics wise.

 

Edited June 10, 2021 by DaemonPhobos

[CaptHawk]

In the meantime....

[rydhmic]

Can't wait for the AH-64D Apacke comes to presale.. Played it already on the C64 with pixel graphics. I really look forward to the release, which i would buy blindly as soon as possible. You maybe know what a joy it is flying this my favorite helicopter. It will have a special place on my 17 addons. I greatly appreciate the quality of your modules, mastering every plane is challenging but rewarding. Just for training i  spend hours.  If you mantain your quality, you're gonna be unbeatable. Go on guys, Btw. any news about release on Steam?

 

There are some planes i would be nice to have (in my opinion) for DCS. I could give a list, but it would be quite long. So i choosed the 3 most desired planes:

 

1. B1 and B2 Bomber

2. F-117 A

3. F-19

4. F-35

5. New F-15 C Version

6. Mig 33 and 35

7. SR-71 and A-12

 

ok, these weren't 3 planes, but i could'nt resist to mention them.  I think these planes are jewels. What do you think about?

 

Greets

[Shark 3-1]

Some of those are to modern for example the f-35 would not be possible because it contains classified features.

[Krez]

The F-19 isn't even acknowledged to exist.

 

[Bedouin]

On 6/27/2021 at 5:20 AM, rydhmic said:

Can't wait for the AH-64D Apacke comes to presale.. Played it already on the C64 with pixel graphics. I really look forward to the release, which i would buy blindly as soon as possible. You maybe know what a joy it is flying this my favorite helicopter. It will have a special place on my 17 addons. I greatly appreciate the quality of your modules, mastering every plane is challenging but rewarding. Just for training i  spend hours.  If you mantain your quality, you're gonna be unbeatable. Go on guys, Btw. any news about release on Steam?

 

There are some planes i would be nice to have (in my opinion) for DCS. I could give a list, but it would be quite long. So i choosed the 3 most desired planes:

 

1. B1 and B2 Bomber

2. F-117 A

3. F-19

4. F-35

5. New F-15 C Version

6. Mig 33 and 35

7. SR-71 and A-12

 

ok, these weren't 3 planes, but i could'nt resist to mention them.  I think these planes are jewels. What do you think about?

 

Greets

For me there a some other aircraft, i want more than the above mentioned:

 

* F-15E Strike Eagle (know its on its way, but doesnt even look close to EA)

* Dassault Rafale

* JAS Gripen

* KA-52 or MI-28

[Volator]

... and yet another aircraft-specific thread turns into a general aircraft wishlist thread 

[Bedouin]

1 hour ago, Pilot Ike said:

... and yet another aircraft-specific thread turns into a general aircraft wishlist thread 

True I am at false, but together with all of these Early Access and Release date threads, its easy to fall prey for them...

[Volator]

2 hours ago, Bedouin said:

with all of these Early Access and Release date threads, its easy to fall prey for them...

True, true 

[VDV]

havent been here for a long time, is apache ready for pre-order or EA now? thanks.

Edited June 29, 2021 by VDV

[Raptor9]

12 hours ago, VDV said:

havent been here for a long time, is apache ready for pre-order or EA now? thanks.

 

Neither as of yet.

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Being patience, it would be my first hello purchase since Jane’s Longbow.

[Lurker]

15 hours ago, VFGiPJP said:

Being patience, it would be my first hello purchase since Jane’s Longbow.

 

You should really get the Hind, it will tide you over nicely until the Longbow. 

Edited July 9, 2021 by Lurker

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

In my book, I see no reason to buy 2 chapters for similar profile...it is just me...

[Lurker]

1 hour ago, VFGiPJP said:

In my book, I see no reason to buy 2 chapters for similar profile...it is just me...

 

I assume you mean choppers? If you mean the Mi24P and the Apache they are not really that similar. Not really. Apart from carrying somewhat similar loadouts their tactical use is drastically different. 

More importantly I can fly and fight in the Hind right now, while I will have to wait god knows how long to get access to the Apache. In my book the Apache is the less interesting helicopter, but I'm having so much fun with multicrew in the Hind that I will gladly buy the Apache just to experience it in a more modern helicopter. 

[VDV]

havent been there for a long time, so when is expected for AH-64 to be in EA?

[ArjenHVA]

2 minutes ago, VDV said:

havent been there for a long time, so when is expected for AH-64 to be in EA?

Nothing has changed, whenever they are ready.

[oscar19681]

On 7/9/2021 at 10:31 PM, VDV said:

havent been there for a long time, so when is expected for AH-64 to be in EA?

Its safe to say we won’t see any EA this year. They supposed to start preorder in may, but we we in July now. News has been very limited and it seem development has been slow. 

Edited July 13, 2021 by oscar19681