New better free Plane(s)

[Beirut]

7 hours ago, TOViper said:

Other thing: ED could add the F-5 Tiger instead of the - IMHO - totally useless SU-25T (or simply add it).
 

 

I see no basis for that statement. 

 

We have to remember the Su-25T was a free plane long before the free trials started. The Su-25T gave everyone a taste of how guided weapons worked in DCS, both laser guided and SEAD missiles. It even has some nighttime weapons capabilities with the Mercury pod. It's a solid ground pounder with tons of firepower from a variety of weapon types. If someone was looking at what A2G fun could be had with DCS, the Su-25T was a solid intro. And it's an absolute beast of a rocket thrower, maybe the best in the game.  

 

To cite it as "totally useless" ignores the fact that it was(is) a free bomb truck with decent speed that shoots ginormous laser guided missiles and carries a wide assortment of weapons. The Su-25T can probably carry more destruction on one wing than the F-5 can in total. I enjoy the F-5, but the SU-25T kills it as far as A2G goes. In that light, it made for a very good starter plane to get you into the warheads on foreheads groove of the game. 

[Evoman]

A while ago I saw an interview with ED when this question came up relating to the free aircraft. The ED staff agreed that the current free aircraft are not well suited for DCS now. They did conclude that they are in the process of selecting better aircraft that are better suited to train new pilots just like they would be a progression in the military.

In my opinion they need to include aircraft that are not only easy to learn but that will better prepare new pilots to move up to purchasing a new module. One such aircraft that ED already has is the F-5 Tiger. Its not too different than the T38 Talon that the Air Force has used for decades to train pilots.  As for a helicopter trainer they could feature something like a TH-57 Sea Ranger variant out of the work that has already been done on the OH-58 Kiowa. I am sure Polychop would be happy to cooperate if it means selling more Kiowas as a result.

 

 

Edited March 5, 2023 by Evoman

[Migratingcoconut]

10 minutes ago, Evoman said:

A while ago I saw an interview with ED when this question came up relating to the free aircraft. The ED staff agreed that the current free aircraft are not well suited for DCS now. They did conclude that they are in the process of selecting better aircraft that are better suited to train new pilots just like they would be a progression in the military.

In my opinion they need to include aircraft that are not only easy to learn but that will better prepare new pilots to move up to purchasing a new module. One such aircraft that ED already has is the F-5 Tiger. Its not too different than the T38 Talon that the Air Force has used for decades to train pilots.  As for a helicopter trainer they could feature something like a TH-57 Sea Ranger variant out of the work that has already been done on the OH-58 Kiowa. I am sure Polychop would be happy to cooperate if it means selling more Kiowas as a result.

 

 

Well that sounds very compelling, I'd love check that one out if you can post a link.

The T-38 makes a lot of sense not just because it has been the USAF trainer for ages now, but because it presents the right difficulties that are relevant in terms of flight characteristics. I definitely think if you can master it, you can probably learn to fly most jets just fine. I did demo the f-5 once and took away from it that it had a decently long spool up, pretty high takeoff and landing speed, no fly-by-wire, and is capable of going supersonic. It'll teach ya the basics you need to know and punish mistakes enough but not so much it's a flawed design. Didn't they make an AT version of it with some armaments?

[Migratingcoconut]

1 hour ago, Atazar SPN said:

If +-100 new customers access a fourth generation full loyalty module for free, you are losing sales of other modules and with it you are losing funding. A company cannot develop without financing. That would lead to cutbacks in the team I guess. I don't have to be absolutely right, but this is my opinion. I personally am not interested in ED stopping paying its employees and developing due to insolvency. There is already enough free material to get started.

Do you mean something substantial like an F/A-18 super hornet? In that case I would absolutely agree it would hurt the company very badly.
Would it make a difference what plane they chose? Say, a simpler airplane such as the F-117A or T-38? I'd wager something akin to those is a recipe for profit, and I don't think I have to be absolutely right either.

I know there is a real degree of optimism over realism on my part here. After all, I haven't been on a development team for something like this or know what things look like inside of ED. But this probably applies to most if not everyone who has posted here thus far as well.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't have to work via direct profit from the module and so there would be a longer period of time between the investment and the payoff. In that case I do understand how that would give ED pause as it's not as simple a matter as the usual module development & release.

I will say when I read stuff like: 'they can't devote a team for even a single free module because it will irrevocably harm them, set them back, or ruin them in some way'; this just seems too pessimistic. Even if it doesn't assume the worst plane possible is chosen, it just doesn't make any sense given what little I do happen to know about ED.

They would not have a harder time paying their employees should they put them to work on something like this. In this case, the sales aren't obviously going to be provided by this module, nor as immediately. But they already know what this is like given there are two free planes already, and the core game is also free. Clearly free stuff, if executed properly, benefits ED financially, and they can grow and split development teams as the company expands, just as they have been doing. I think we can all agree there. So I agree profit must come from somewhere; and in the case of what I am suggesting, why would it go any differently?

My feeling is essentially that the payoff, while stretched over time, will be greater in total than just releasing as one more payed module. The reason is; it will grow the game and give virtually every new user from then on a much better experience than any of us had by neither turning as many away unnecessarily, nor giving away the real selling point of paid modules. I think what really needs to be figured out is what plane would offer the truest 'demo'. If that can be narrowed down, which I don't see why not, then I think there is a real recipe for success here; a win for them, us, and new players.

[Rudel_chw]

I’m uncomfortable with this thread as I feel like I’ve been given a gift of two free aircrafts, and then look into the eye of the gifter and told him "I dont like those, gift me another one or two more and make them full fidelity this time" … entitled much? 

[cfrag]

11 hours ago, Migratingcoconut said:

When it comes to the question of the trials, I think you made a false dichotomy with buying cars.

I think you may want to re-visit the definition of "dichotomy", real or false. There was no "either or"; I made a comparison, and I believe it is apt: if you can make a business decision that can affect a good portion of your financial assets in an hour, I think you can make a business decision about something much less momentous in the span of 2 weeks. The comparison isn't perfect, agreed - the decision to buy a car is much more impactful to your life. The purchase of an entertainment title that doesn't wipe out your bank account is relatively inconsequential compared to that.

Also, we should keep in mind that most entertainment purchases are impulse, spur-of-the-moment decisions; if you really can't tell whether you want to purchase a module after two entire weeks, the odds are >99% that you won't, at least not for now. People don't get two weeks from ED so they can make a "good decision" or to account for some inherent complexity -- we get some time to become excited and trigger our purchase impulse outright; and we don't get more time simply because the likelihood of a sale doesn't increase meaningfully after two weeks ("diminishing returns"). Personally, I contend that two hours are enough (this is an entertainment spur-of-the-moment sale after all), so IMHO two weeks are very, very generous. 

 

Edited March 5, 2023 by cfrag

[SkateZilla]

T-38 is visually similar to the F-5E, Systems and Powerplant wise it's not.

[TOViper]

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

I’m uncomfortable with this thread as I feel like I’ve been given a gift of two free aircrafts, and then look into the eye of the gifter and told him "I dont like those, gift me another one or two more and make them full fidelity this time" … entitled much? 

Hey Rudel!

Maybe you could feel less uncomfortable, by another view.
If there comes a time when ED would ever change their current policy (2 gifts now, 14 day trials), then what about the following scenario:
At first creation of a new account, one aircraft (the user is allowed to choose from a selected pool), is added as well, for - let's say - a period of 2 months (or whatever).
Then the license stops. With the "-50% bonus for first buy", the treshold for the user to really buy this aircraft is anyway much lower.

Whatever is discussed here, I personally think to have two modules for free is really generous (despite I personally could not anything with them in the past, and still cannot do anything with them today). But as I read the 4 answers of the first poll question, it is not the question if there are free modules, but which modules (really hope I got for what it was ment to be).

If there would be a benefit for ED in selling more modules ... I don't know it in general (which is a good idea anyway because I believe then this wonderful sim developes further).
Further above I just stated, that for me (as a customer out of millions), it was a question of the quality of a module (and love btw), not price.
Nothing more, nothing less.

If you don't feel better, ... sorry for my weak try...
Better we go flying
 

Edited March 5, 2023 by TOViper

[TOViper]

9 hours ago, Beirut said:

I see no basis for that statement. 

We have to remember the Su-25T was a free plane long before the free trials started. The Su-25T gave everyone a taste of how guided weapons worked in DCS, both laser guided and SEAD missiles. It even has some nighttime weapons capabilities with the Mercury pod. It's a solid ground pounder with tons of firepower from a variety of weapon types. If someone was looking at what A2G fun could be had with DCS, the Su-25T was a solid intro. And it's an absolute beast of a rocket thrower, maybe the best in the game.  

 

To cite it as "totally useless" ignores the fact that it was(is) a free bomb truck with decent speed that shoots ginormous laser guided missiles and carries a wide assortment of weapons. The Su-25T can probably carry more destruction on one wing than the F-5 can in total. I enjoy the F-5, but the SU-25T kills it as far as A2G goes. In that light, it made for a very good starter plane to get you into the warheads on foreheads groove of the game. 

I understand your words, and I am sorry you (maybe) felt offended (do you?), this was not the idea, really.
Nonetheless, for me personally as a customer of EDs products - I totally ignore/disregard the Su25T module because of one fact: Not beeing able to use the clickable cockpit.
I personally don't care if the one or the other module is more performant or can carry more weapons, that's not the point for me.
In terms of a "starter plane to get you into the warheads" I agree with your opinion, and I am thankful you wrote this, but this might work for persons not able (time problem e.g.) or not motivated to work into the systems; but - as stated - not me.

To get people like me to fly DCS, it needs high fidelity / quality modules, and I know I am not alone with that opinion. If I look around in my flying group ... Flaming Cliffs only when nothing else is possible anymore... (THIS IS NOT A BASHING, ok?)
And you can bet: More users will come up in the future thinking in the same way. Also for Flaming Cliffs. Statistics.

Edited March 5, 2023 by TOViper

[Mike_Romeo]

11 hours ago, Migratingcoconut said:

yes it would be very limited, but that is my point. What it can do it will do authentically as an experience.

Yeah no. If you want a new entry plane, you should select one that offers something of everything but not beeing too good at the same time. Su-33 does that while beeing low fidelity. Also look it that way, the TF-51 is very limited to free flights and air racing but it will do it authentically as an experience.

11 hours ago, Migratingcoconut said:

Once an F-117A would role out-and assume it works as intended-the attention brought to the game would get more people buying other modules + gaining publicity and so on which would mean a new free plane can more than pay for itself.

Higly doubt that. Once they figured out how complex and useless it is, they will get frustraded and left dcs.

[Beirut]

7 minutes ago, TOViper said:

I understand your words, and I am sorry you (maybe) felt offended (do you?), this was not the idea, really.

 

Unless you speak badly of Kentucky bourbon, I am unoffendable.  

 

 

7 minutes ago, TOViper said:

Nonetheless, for me personally as a customer of EDs products - I totally ignore/disregard the Su25T module because of one fact: Not beeing able to use the clickable cockpit.
I personally don't care if the one or the other module is more performant or can carry more weapons, that's not the point for me.
In terms of a "starter plane to get you into the warheads" I agree with your opinion, and I am thankful you wrote this, but this might work for persons not able (time problem e.g.) or not motivated to work into the systems; but - as stated - not me.

 

Perfectly understandable. 

 

7 minutes ago, TOViper said:

To get people like me to fly DCS, it needs high fidelity / quality modules, and I know I am not alone with that opinion. If I look around in my flying group ... Flaming Cliffs only when nothing else is possible anymore... (THIS IS NOT A BASHING, ok?)
And you can bet: More users will come up in the future thinking in the same way. Also for Flaming Cliffs. Statistics.

 

 

I think the free trials covers all the bases now. A guy can grab the Hornet and the Supercarrier and the Syria amp and go to town for two-weeks. Then grab the F-16 and Syria and go to town for another two weeks, and on and on. You can fly for months for free and get a taste test of everything. And then do it all again. I think that obviates the need for a free FF module. My point was to the value of the SU-25T as a free plane when there were no free trials.

 

We can certainly find fault with ED and DCS in different areas, but when it comes to "free introductions" and giving people a taste of the game, they are #1. 

[cfrag]

Just now, Beirut said:

Unless you speak badly of Kentucky bourbon, I am unoffendable.

I think as long as nobody has the temerity to call that stuff "Whisky" we're all good here  

[Beirut]

2 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I think as long as nobody has the temerity to call that stuff "Whisky" we're all good here  

 

Oh lord, are you drinking that overpriced soda pop from the highlands? 

 

[Cab]

Personally, I don't see the need for any of this. ED's offers for entry level players are quite generous, I think.

Core game is a free download; Two free modules with unlimited use; Two-week free trials of most modules; And 50% off a new user's first order, regardless of the number of modules in the order.

If someone can't decide whether or not to commit, they are most likely a "no".

 

[MAXsenna]

Mods like this do give quite a false impression of the cost and work involved in an actual commercial product. They imply ED could just hand these out for free which of course they can’t do. 

The A-4E-C is not a mod though. A "mod" is a modification.
Not gonna explain the difference as I'm sure you actually know the difference.

Cheers!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Daerchanar]

55 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

The A-4E-C is not a mod though. A "mod" is a modification.
Not gonna explain the difference as I'm sure you actually know the difference.

Cheers!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

As a modder myself, that's the first time I heard something like this.

 

[MAXsenna]

 
Oh lord, are you drinking that overpriced soda pop from the highlands? 
 

Quotating a Swiss you should've have highlighted the 'highlands'!

I should really haul my ass over the pond to see the sub Canadian stuff you always praise.

@cfrag is more than welcome to tag along if he brings cheese and chocolate.

Cheers!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

As a modder myself, that's the first time I heard something like this.
 

Happy to pop your cherry.

Counter Strike was a modification of Half Life.

The A-4E-C is a full blown coded module to the DCS environment.

Cheers!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Beirut]

13 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Quotating a Swiss you should've have highlighted the 'highlands'!

 

Oh he knew exactly what I meant when I referred to that overpriced soda pop he probably imbibes.

 

Then again, maybe he's an Islay man. And there ain't no Islay-ands in Switzerland. 

 

 

13 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

I should really haul my ass over the pond to see the sub Canadian stuff you always praise.
 

 

Kentucky, my esteemed fellow flyer. Kentucky. 

 

Just took the Su-25T out for a quick romp and that thing is the king of mobile artillery. A 700kph run in with a delivery of 256 rockets. Definitely a plane worth revisiting.

[MAXsenna]

 
Kentucky, my esteemed fellow flyer. Kentucky. 
 
Just took the Su-25T out for a quick romp and that thing is the king of mobile artillery. A 700kph run in with a delivery of 256 rockets. Definitely a plane worth revisiting.

Oh! That soda! I agree. That's way overprised.
The Isles are more my going to be honest. We have some similar stuff here that needs to be physically transported around the world before it hits the shelves.
Prefer the islish ones though.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Cab]

1 hour ago, MAXsenna said:

Happy to pop your cherry.

Counter Strike was a modification of Half Life.

The A-4E-C is a full blown coded module to the DCS environment.

On a multiplayer server doesn't the A-4 look like a Su-27 to someone who doesn't have the A-4 installed?

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

The A-4E-C is not a mod though. A "mod" is a modification.
Not gonna explain the difference as I'm sure you actually know the difference.

Cheers!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

Ok let’s use the term unofficial user-created modules. We all know what these are, they get universally referred to as “mods”. They don’t need to meet the same standards as the commercial products, therefore not a good point of comparison. 

[DD_Friar]

Coming from Il2 for me the A4-E has been fantastic. It is teaching me a grounding on all of the functions of a "modern" fighter jet. Through playing with this I will undoubtedly be sucked into buying either an F16 or F14 probably once the sales come round again although I am weakening under the two little voices from my squad mates sitting on my shoulder, on my left @DD_Fenrir "buy the F14".. on my right @DD_fruitbat "buy the F16..."

Without such a high quality option for free I would probably have stuck to Combined Arms and playing with the tanks only.

[SharpeXB]

9 minutes ago, DD_Friar said:

Without such a high quality option for free I would probably have stuck to Combined Arms and playing with the tanks only.

Why is that? Again there’s a free trial. A free mod plane isn’t necessary as an introduction to DCS

[SharpeXB]

8 hours ago, Migratingcoconut said:

I know there is a real degree of optimism over realism on my part here. After all, I haven't been on a development team for something like this or know what things look like inside of ED.

I realize you’re new to DCS. Welcome!

But what you should realize about this game is that it’s a complicated niche sim. ED is a great company that makes a very unique product and they are quite beleaguered in delivering it. It’s quite apparent that the cash flow from the small base of players means it takes years for even seemingly simple things to be accomplished. Nothing is simple or easy here and the aircraft modules specifically take years to complete. There’s no such thing here as “simpler airplane such as the F-117A or T-38”
If you ask me, the path for delivering something like a demo T-38 into the game would be to first sell it as a paid module, work it through Early Access and then when sales eventually cool off and it’s completed it would move into the slot of being the free demo. That process would probably take the better part of a decade. So perhaps it’s better to just pick a module which is past its prime as a paid product, perhaps the L-39 Albatros and use that. 

Edited March 5, 2023 by SharpeXB

[Tank50us]

Honestly, one thing that DCS lacks is a good helicopter trainer. Two weeks is long enough to evaluate a plane or helo, but only if you have a firm grasp on the fundamentals. So, for my suggestion of a free helo to fill this void, I propose that they pick something from the MD500 Family.

Why? Well, for starters, they're everywhere, they've been used in a multitude of conflicts, and have served in a multitude of roles.

Law Enforcement:

Infrastructure work:

Fire Fighting:

And of course, Military work: