Jump to content

simulation accuracy


CZQS

Recommended Posts

After the experience of AV8B and M2000C, will RAZBAM make F15E like these two planes, will frequently change the system operation content, which will increase the learning time and cost. I would love to ask RAZBAM official staff to answer this question.

Can you guys give us an accurate simulation of the F15E?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, CZQS said:

Can you guys give us an accurate simulation of the F15E?

I'm sure they'll do their best but the question is, if/when they receive or find information from  SME's, etc. that they've modelled something wrong or ED add support for a new feature - do you want Razbam to ignore the problem/opportunity.

Comment

• While a few of the problems with the early access M-2000C were from misunderstanding of how various things worked, most of the changes we see today are thanks to working with the AdA and receiving much better info.

• As to the AV-8B, AFAIK the original plan was to model a mid 90's - mid 2000's variant, however there was a desire among players to deploy newer weapons such as Gen 4 TPOD, GBU-54 and APKWS. Razbam could have ignored these requests but instead took advantage of the availability of SME's to add newer weapons and OFP systems/limitations.

1 hour ago, CZQS said:

... which will increase the learning time and cost.

Your only cost was time which is offset by having access to a module that later receives improvements and updates for FREE.

  • Like 13

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CZQS said:

After the experience of AV8B and M2000C, will RAZBAM make F15E like these two planes, will frequently change the system operation content, which will increase the learning time and cost. I would love to ask RAZBAM official staff to answer this question.

Can you guys give us an accurate simulation of the F15E?

And are you able to provide RAZBAM with a F-15E which they could fly for the last 5 years, attacking air targets, ground targets, approaching take-off and landing in various conditions, maneuvering it within its limits?

If so, I'm sure you'll get what you want.

If you haven't delivered it to the RAZBAM team in the last 5 years, don't ask stupid questions ...

I wonder what must happen to this world for people to start using their minds ... at least 5% ...

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CZQS said:

After the experience of AV8B and M2000C, will RAZBAM ….


What experience? You’ve been here less than two years 😶

  • Like 3

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ramsay said:

我相信他们会尽力而为,但问题是,如果/何时他们从 SME 等收到或找到信息,他们是否建模错误或 ED 添加对新功能的支持 - 你是否希望 Razbam 忽略问题/机会。

评论

• 虽然早期访问 M-2000C 的一些问题是由于对各种工作方式的误解,但我们今天看到的大部分变化都归功于与 AdA 合作并获得了更好的信息。

• 至于 AV-8B,AFAIK 最初的计划是为 90 年代中期 - 2000 年代中期的变体建模,但玩家希望部署更新的武器,例如 Gen 4 TPOD、GBU-54 和 APKWS。Razbam 可以忽略这些请求,而是利用 SME 的可用性来添加更新的武器和 OFP 系统/限制。

您唯一的成本是时间,可以通过访问稍后免费获得改进和更新的模块来抵消。

 

6 hours ago, Ramsay said:

我相信他们会尽力而为,但问题是,如果/何时他们从 SME 等收到或找到信息,他们是否建模错误或 ED 添加对新功能的支持 - 你是否希望 Razbam 忽略问题/机会。

评论

• 虽然早期访问 M-2000C 的一些问题是由于对各种工作方式的误解,但我们今天看到的大部分变化都归功于与 AdA 合作并获得了更好的信息。

• 至于 AV-8B,AFAIK 最初的计划是为 90 年代中期 - 2000 年代中期的变体建模,但玩家希望部署更新的武器,例如 Gen 4 TPOD、GBU-54 和 APKWS。Razbam 可以忽略这些请求,而是利用 SME 的可用性来添加更新的武器和 OFP 系统/限制。

您唯一的成本是时间,可以通过访问稍后免费获得改进和更新的模块来抵消。

Maybe I can buy it for a while and watch it develop

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s a Valid question, for example the Harrier has been revisioned multiple times, granted it was all in good faith to model the systems more accurately, same with mirage, but the fact is it makes it hard to learn a module when over many years systems dramatically change.  Healthy and constructive criticism should be a welcome thing.  One way to see how things dramatically changed and make new pilots of harrier have a harder time is the training missions.  They are the best in the business but since stuff… changed so much and dramatically most do not work.

  I suspect Razbam has fundamentally changed there sop’s and i suspect the f15E will come out how they wanted both the Harrier and Mirage to come out as far as projects go.

I am in the camp that Razbam is now one of the Best developers in Dcs. ED has allot they could learn with certain regards, aka Radar…. Hence makes the F15E so exciting. 

  • Like 6

I7 4770k @ 4.6, sli 980 evga oc edition, ssdx2, Sony 55 inch edid hack nvidia 3dvision. Volair sim pit, DK2 Oculus Rift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

幻影2000和AV-8早期的问题主要是因为他们都是最早的DCS第三方模组,当时dcs还是1.2? 1.5版本 当时dcs本身能模拟的东西就比较有限(比如雷达),给dev能用的api也很有限,所以他们用了些替代方案来实现dcs不能模拟的东西(所以会有很多不完善的地方)。之后随着dcs本体的更新和完善,支持的功能越来越多,加上新的飞机资料的公开,当功能可以被dcs支持的时候这些系统就被重写来实现更好的模拟。 现在DCS World平台已经远比1.5时代完善了,比如去年年底的2000大更新已经让2000变成dcs模拟水平最好的模组之一,所以我觉得也许15E不会再在主要的系统上再有之前的问题应该。

The early problems of the Mirage and AV-8 were due to they are some of the very first 3rd party projects for DCS, the DCS was still 1.2 or 1.5 when they were released IIRC.At that time,there were a lot of limitations on system implementation in DCS and the API for devs(ie Radar). So they had to make some short cuts in coding to achieve something that the DCS core can't achieve at that moment.(so that's where the bugs came from). Then with the development of dcs core,more and more stuffs are supported by DCS API. And the system is overhauled when the condition is ideal. The DCS World today is far better than it was in ver 1.5,and the winter update last year for the Mirage has made it one of the best modules in DCS World,hence,personally I think you shouldn't worry too much about the major systems of the Eagle.


Edited by Akiazusa
  • Like 3

Kyoto Animation forever!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, rcjonessnp175 said:

这是一个有效的问题,例如,Harrier 已被多次修订,这一切都是为了更准确地对系统建模,海市蜃楼也是如此,但事实是,经过多年的系统,学习一个模块变得很困难发生巨大变化。健康和建设性的批评应该是受欢迎的。了解事情如何发生巨大变化并使鹞式新飞行员更加困难的一种方法是训练任务。他们是业内最好的,但由于东西……变化如此之大,而且大多数都不起作用。

  我怀疑 Razbam 已经从根本上改变了那里的 sop,我怀疑 f15E 会按照他们希望 Harrier 和 Mirage 的项目出现的方式出现。

我认为 Razbam 现在是 Dcs 中最好的开发者之一。ED 分配了他们可以在某些方面学习的资源,也就是雷达…… 因此使 F15E 如此令人兴奋。 

I started playing DCS in 2019, and I especially liked the AV8B that can take off and land vertically.

But at that time, the operation method of the instructional video I saw on youtube was different from when I started to play AV8B. I only found out after asking, RAZBAM has made changes to the operation method of the aircraft, which led to the invalidation of the instructional video. Many people said that because the code at that time was too old, the current DCS should not have such a problem.Based on this, I still choose to believe in RAZBAM, I'll see how it goes a year after its release.

7 hours ago, Akiazusa said:

幻影200和AV-8的早期问题是因为他们当初的DC还是因为原作2,当时的DC?1.5版本如果dcs的东西能够模拟的东西就比较有限(比如雷达),给开发者用的api也很有限,所以他们用一些替代方案来实现dcs不能模拟的(所以有很多不完善的地方)之后这些随着dcs本体的更新和完善,支持的功能越来越多,加上新飞机资料公开的功能可以被dcs的时间系统),就支持实现更好的模拟。现在DCS World平台已经远比1.5时代完善了,比如去年年底的2000大更新已经让2000个dcs模拟水平最好的模组,所以我觉得15E不会再成为主要的系统上再有之前的问题应该。

Mirage 和 AV-8 早期的问题是因为它们是 DCS 的第一个 3rd 方项目,当他们发布 IIRC 时,DCS 还是 1.2 或 1.5。当时,有很多限制DCS 中的系统实现和开发人员的 API(即雷达)。所以他们不得不在编码上做一些捷径,以实现 DCS 核心当时无法实现的东西。(这就是错误的来源)。然后随着dcs核心的发展,越来越多的东西被DCS API支持。并在条件理想时对系统进行大修。今天的 DCS World 比 1.5 版本要好得多,去年 Mirage 的冬季更新使它成为 DCS World 中最好的模块之一,因此,我个人认为你不应该太担心主要鹰的系统。

 

Okay, I'm sure RAZBAM will take care to accurately simulate this F15E. There should be no more mistakes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, CZQS said:

Okay, I'm sure RAZBAM will take care to accurately simulate this F15E. There should be no more mistakes.

You must realise that the availability of information and feedback on how the real systems work compared to the sim will change after the module is released and a bigger number of experienced people get their hands on it.
 

Every complex module for DCS has had functionality changes after being released, perhaps not to the same extent as the M2000, but still things have changed over the life of the modules. The F-15E will be no different. One cannot expect it to be perfect at the first attempt.


Edited by Deano87
  • Like 1

Proud owner of:

PointCTRL VR : Finger Trackers for VR -- Real Simulator : FSSB R3L Force Sensing Stick. -- Deltasim : Force Sensor WH Slew Upgrade -- Mach3Ti Ring : Real Flown Mach 3 SR-71 Titanium, made into an amazing ring.

 

My Fathers Aviation Memoirs: 50 Years of Flying Fun - From Hunter to Spitfire and back again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Deano87 said:

You must realise that the availability of information and feedback on how the real systems work compared to the sim will change after the module is released and a bigger number of experienced people get their hands on it.
 

Every complex module for DCS has had functionality changes after being released, perhaps not to the same extent as the M2000, but still things have changed over the life of the modules. The F-15E will be no different. One cannot expect it to be perfect at the first attempt.

 

Yes, but I still hope it doesn't change too much.Such as system logic, weapon operation method.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CZQS said:

Yes, but I still hope it doesn't change too much.Such as system logic, weapon operation method.

So what if it does? I don't care if it changes every patch if it makes it better and more realistic.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are not talking about if the changes later to make the module better should be welcomed, but whether that a module is not as completed at first and has to be fixed in long term, rather than relatively completed at first release, should be welcomed.

I would understand a dev team if a module was made with presumptive features first due to lack of information or deficiency of DCS platform and changes every patch to be more realistic. The earlier flaw was cause by external conditions which they can't control and I would still support them. We see this situation in many teams. Raz made the M2k with difficulty of lacking information, and Deka made a coarse A-G radar DBS mode before ED's API. Such things are imperfect at first but that could be forgiven, especially considering now we have free trial to know that before purchase.

But I would also still get disappointed when I were too frequently told that "your former learning and practice are no more useful from now on because that's not how the real one works". I mean just to the module and not to the dev team. I won't blame the team as I know they are no less annoyed than me by the endless work to change the system to more realistic one.

Of course a complete module from the first release is the best. But if unavailable, I can hardly tell which way is better, a presumptive makeshift before a complete system, or a placeholder like the F-16. As for the F-15E I hope to know how they would deal with the AN/AAQ-13 pod and SAR, complete at first release, placeholder until done or presumptive makeshift.

If someone wants a suggestion I would still recommend to postpone any new module, regardless of the team, to see its degree of completion and weigh it with your love to the aircraft. Anyone has a different tolerance to the continuous changes needed to the module. The best way is to try and decide it yourself.

Finally I must say I'm now more confident with Raz after the rework of M2k and AV-8B and the gradually started revise to the MiG-19P. I'm optimistic about the F-15E and wish them a great work on it. 

  • Like 2

Human allowed, demon allowed, Deka never allowed.

Distort allowed, provoke allowed, fight back never allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/19/2022 at 11:59 PM, CZQS said:

After the experience of AV8B and M2000C, will RAZBAM make F15E like these two planes, will frequently change the system operation content, which will increase the learning time and cost. I would love to ask RAZBAM official staff to answer this question.

Can you guys give us an accurate simulation of the F15E?

 Can you remember this is a video game and treat your entertainment accordingly?

  • Like 3

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 5/20/2022 at 5:59 AM, CZQS said:

After the experience of AV8B and M2000C, will RAZBAM make F15E like these two planes, will frequently change the system operation content, which will increase the learning time and cost. I would love to ask RAZBAM official staff to answer this question.

Can you guys give us an accurate simulation of the F15E?

I sympathize but there is a simple solution. Wait.

Don't play the early access module at all and even after full release wait another couple of years. At that point it is unlikely that there will be significant changes.

 


Edited by Scott-S6
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own the M2000, I highly respect Razbam and think they are right up there with Heatblur as far as quality goes. But I do have what I feel is a valid criticism. 

And that is the tutorials and with M2000 included campaign... they lag behind the changes quite a bit. Updating a module - wonderful. Making changes and then lagging in the tutorial updates can be, sometimes, worse then not updating the module. Just say'n.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/18/2022 at 10:56 AM, Scott-S6 said:

Don't play the early access module at all and even after full release wait another couple of years. At that point it is unlikely that there will be significant changes.

Unfortunately that is simply not true for DCS where core changes to the AI, lighting, weather, etc. can break missions and campaigns long after a module is "finished" and the campaign "maker" has moved on to other projects.

While the Mirage still had issues (FM tuning, etc.) 6 months after release - it's training and campaign missions probably never worked better with DCS, M-2000C and it's missions built and tested on a common version of DCS.

2 hours ago, flameoutme said:

Making changes and then lagging in the tutorial updates can be, sometimes, worse then not updating the module. Just say'n.

I have to disagree but I guess your comment shows Razbam can never please "all of the people".

Even before the latest Mirage updates, changes and new bugs in DCS were breaking mission triggers, etc. in missions/campaigns i.e. changes in airport parking sizes changed the location of large (C130) aircraft and blocked taxiways. The author(s) of these missions have a different skill set and mission edits require extensive testing and perhaps voice acting.

As you might expect, after +5 years, circumstances change and it's not always possible for the author(s) to update missions as promptly as they would like (see A-10C Piercing Fury).

IMHO it's great to see long standing issues such as HUD ILS logic, INS updates/errors, in depth radar simulation, etc. coming to the Mirage and while I would like the training missions to be updated in step with changes, understand why this is not always possible.

Speculation

I suspect Razbam have learned from maintaining the Mirage/AV-8B and the F-15E's training missions will be created in house.

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't trying to slam Razbam.  And they do please me lots.  But the point is,  it can be highly frustrating when the teaching tools provided by the developer are OBE for extended periods of time.

I understand that lots of changes would drive costs up with frequently updated tutorials.. but even a work around is welcomed.  For example, Razbam could add some text in the Air-to-Air Missle tutorial description such as  "The Magic missle firing procedures have changed substantially.  Those shown in this tutorial will no longer work."  Note: I made this example up.

Would that be so hard to do? At least for the most impactful changes.


Edited by flameoutme
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, flameoutme said:

I own the M2000, I highly respect Razbam and think they are right up there with Heatblur as far as quality goes. But I do have what I feel is a valid criticism. 

And that is the tutorials and with M2000 included campaign... they lag behind the changes quite a bit. Updating a module - wonderful. Making changes and then lagging in the tutorial updates can be, sometimes, worse then not updating the module. Just say'n.

hopefully we have guys like Chuck that updates the manual and youtubers that tell you what have been changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YouTubers won't necessarily do it, and old videos will still come up in search results, because their creators typically don't go back and mark them as outdated. I hope RAZBAM learned from the M2000 and the Harrier that it's better to do things right the first time than get them wrong and fix them later. Fortunately, they seem to have better SME support than when they first made those two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, cmbaviator said:

hopefully we have guys like Chuck that updates the manual and youtubers that tell you what have been changed.

Of course, that's true. And given enough time, energy, investigation and do overs trying to get something to work that was item #57 in patch #4,  most people can figure out the new procedures or changes after some effort.  But this is no way to attract new players... or in my case... someone trying to get back into a module after being away from it for a couple of years. If anyone thinks that is the best way to attract and grow the community, let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

You can choose to just not buy Early Access modules. They are not supposed to be a finished product. It's a work in progress at every point before the full release and even after that dcs core additions and new api's may enable some additional features in the future. With the new two weeks trial you can even evaluate yourself if the simulation accuracy is to your liking or not - for free. I don't think there is any bad in developers releasing early builds to support their work on the modules. If you think your time investment deserves a more final version you will have to be patient and wait for full release.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...