need evidence Sorry, but 20 mins of INS prec alignment is far too long for sim and needs pre-aligned option.

[Wostg]

Yeah that was a terrible response, absolute clownshoes. 

That said, a 20 minute enforced-wait is never going to happen but I have embraced fixtaking as a part of gameplay and it is 'neat'.

[Hobel]

Am 5.2.2024 um 10:28 schrieb zerO_crash:

In this case, few care about what you believe, because at the end of fhe day, this is a simulator environment! If you want to take-off instantly, then you chose the wrong product, the market is saturated with software allowing you to spawn into battle with unlimited combat loads.

 

Luckily, ED PR this software as a simulator themselves, and if you, or anyone here, lacks 20 minutes for a full alignment procedure, they should consider thoroughly if they should be spending time on a simulator. This translates even more to reading up on manuals and understanding the aircraft, which requires even more time than that!

 

Let me introduce you, and the rest of the apparent heretics here to a new thought! Instead of starting up within 5 minutes (that's why accelerated INS procedure exists!), flying to the AO and getting shot down instantly (because you never planned anything, least of all, your flight), resulting in multiple restarts per session (accounting to more than 20 minutes, I'm sure!). You might as well use those 20 minutes of alignment to carefully look at where you're going, and what threats are estimated along the route, read the briefing you never have time for, and the likes. That way, at least you'll have more chance of staying alive.

 

In the end, if the task proves too monumental to handle, luckily, as mentioned before, you can go to the mission editor on equip your Ka-50 with baby wheels (reduced INS alignment times). The option however, is a detraction from reality, something this simulator wants to achieve, thus not being default. Qualitative estimations of how many people want the realistic INS vs. unrealistic one, is irrelevant. None of you have either data, nor any evidence for this. I however, have evidence that people join this simulator due to the realism aspect, as its main selling key. That's that!

 

In reality, this is probably done by the ground crew in all cases, the pilots have better things to do than sit in the helicopter for 20 minutes and do nothing.  

The briefing is carried out beforehand and then they get into a helicopter that is on standby "ready to go"     In dcs we have the problem that most server admins don't know what the INS in ka50 is all about and leave it on default...  

  Even in missions we use "stored ins" because we only get into the machines after briefing.
and waiting 20 minutes would be absurd.   

"Realism" to do something every time that the pilots probably rarely do themselves.    

Time is an important resource.  I'm also a fan of being as realistic as possible, but waiting 20 minutes for an imaginary timer to expire is just absurd

[BigBorner]

Am 5.2.2024 um 10:28 schrieb zerO_crash:

This translates even more to reading up on manuals and understanding the aircraft, which requires even more time than that!

Its just - those are fun activities. Thats why we are here. 

Waiting 20 Minutes for alignment on a MP server with good chances that you survive less then your alignment time - not so much. (yeah, yeah get gud)

 

But, at the end of the day - I dont understand why this discussion exist, considering that the option to change that long alignment time does exist already. The only thing i am personally misssing is an information how the Server you join is configured in regards to that. you never know until you try. thats a bit annoying. 

[Raisuli]

I always have a Minion start my AH-50 while I continue to relax in my ready room. 

There's realism, then there's realistic.  I don't get paid to do this, so it has to fit into the time available.  Realistically pretending to fly seems to make more sense than pretending to do walk arounds and review maintenance logs and talk about gripes with ground crew and finally strap in and start up.  After an hour or two the brakes might come off.  Meanwhile outside my simulator it's time to make dinner...so it wouldn't matter if I had unlimited fuel and ammo set, my play time is over.

Then again, some people might have to worry about all those things that seem to interfere with gaming and have virtually limitless time to align INS before every flight. 

Problem solved in both cases.

[Hobel]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb BigBorner:

But, at the end of the day - I dont understand why this discussion exist, considering that the option to change that long alignment time does exist already. The only thing i am personally misssing is an information how the Server you join is configured in regards to that. you never know until you try. thats a bit annoying. 

You can check it by yourself.

[zerO_crash]

4 hours ago, Wostg said:

Yeah that was a terrible response, absolute clownshoes. 

That said, a 20 minute enforced-wait is never going to happen but I have embraced fixtaking as a part of gameplay and it is 'neat'.

 

If a response that does not share your view is "absolute clownshoes", then I suppose a big enough mirror is needed. I would suggest asking yourself the question what you are doing here, instead of a "flight game" where waiting times equal zero.

 

3 hours ago, Hobel said:

In reality, this is probably done by the ground crew in all cases, the pilots have better things to do than sit in the helicopter for 20 minutes and do nothing.  

The briefing is carried out beforehand and then they get into a helicopter that is on standby "ready to go"     In dcs we have the problem that most server admins don't know what the INS in ka50 is all about and leave it on default...  

  Even in missions we use "stored ins" because we only get into the machines after briefing.
and waiting 20 minutes would be absurd.   

"Realism" to do something every time that the pilots probably rarely do themselves.    

Time is an important resource.  I'm also a fan of being as realistic as possible, but waiting 20 minutes for an imaginary timer to expire is just absurd

 

In reality, I'm pretty sure that it's not as black/white as one would think. Just because there is a common norm/practice, doesn't rule out that a pilot would do this by himself. Especially nowadays, when budgets have become a serious limitation compared to 50s/60s/70s. Even considering the average situation, 20 minutes allows for a proper flight preparation. Also, there are sadly many things we still lack in DCS (we have come far though!), of them being a proper briefing-room, proper briefing documentation (this can be alleviated by mission designers) and most of all, proper tools for projecting flight plans on the F10-map. I would not say that waiting 20 minutes is any more absurd, than pilots having waited in/near their aircraft for a go-ahead in different kinds of operations (on-time requirements, or awaiting a final clearance). In essence, this is no different than pulling off a realistic CAP/CAS/SAR/+++ missions. Time is indeed a proper resource, but there are many other important ones. As I mentioned, most people use up their time by not preparing properly, and thus restarting an aircraft multiple times. Ultimately, this discussion is dead, and that's because DCS replicates a military aviator simulator, without the "classified"-inhibitors. We are bound to have certain aspects somewhat less realistic, but that is still a single digit percentage, vs. people asking for something to be made unrealistic in order to be more accessible. The ruling principle of this product, is that it is a simulator - as real as we can get it, while not getting jailed. The option to shorten the INS-startup, is already there, but not by default. Making it default is completely wrong, as it detracts from reality. It might replicate SOP better, but as a system, it works wrong. The proper way of going about this, is waiting for an expanded ground crew (more refined). At that point, it would be solved properly. Still, I see it as being a mission option. The whole problem in this thread, is that people with different conceptions of what DCS is to them, ask for neural changes to be made. That's the problem! Most newcomers as well! At this point, I state again: If you don't have time for comitting in DCS, then you can either create your own server/mission and host it, or seek a simple product tailored to your needs. It's that simple!

 

For example: Many wanted Ah-64, relatively few fly it! Why?! Because many found out that it's a tad more complicated aircraft to fly than what they initially presumed. As such, the urge to go for a different airframe is greater, than reading the manual. That's the essence of the discussion in here as well. Private beliefs of what a simulator should be like.

 

3 hours ago, Raisuli said:

I always have a Minion start my AH-50 while I continue to relax in my ready room. 

There's realism, then there's realistic.  I don't get paid to do this, so it has to fit into the time available.  Realistically pretending to fly seems to make more sense than pretending to do walk arounds and review maintenance logs and talk about gripes with ground crew and finally strap in and start up.  After an hour or two the brakes might come off.  Meanwhile outside my simulator it's time to make dinner...so it wouldn't matter if I had unlimited fuel and ammo set, my play time is over.

Then again, some people might have to worry about all those things that seem to interfere with gaming and have virtually limitless time to align INS before every flight. 

Problem solved in both cases.

 

Again, subjective perception on what a simulator should simulate or not. With DCS attempting to move a normally classified simulator setting to commerical grounds, one assumes that you are a pilot willing to sit there kitted out in a suit and taking it seriously. That's the essence of it. If you however have a different concept of what you wish to simulate, and what you wish to jump over (because you have a family/dog/laissez faire attiude/some other hobby, etc...), you are fully allowed to do so by altering these settings in the mission editor. Remember that on the other side of the table, are people who for example want to relive their former careers (former military pilots), or e.g. actual private/commercial pilots who never got the chance, and would gladly learn all they can about their favourite aircraft. Again, this whole topic is beyond the point due to pure speculation and "I want, therefore do it."-attitude. DCS with it's realism aspect has formed its core much before many of the new members joined. Sometimes, it is important to remind of that.

 

When it comes to this thread, DCS currently allows to deliver an experience both to purists, as well as those seeking more arcade. Asking ED to tailor it to a subjective time schedule, is highly irrelevant, and more so, lacking insight.

[PawlaczGMD]

On 2/7/2024 at 9:04 AM, Wostg said:

 

That said, a 20 minute enforced-wait is never going to happen but I have embraced fixtaking as a part of gameplay and it is 'neat'.

Fixtaking doesn't fix a poor alignment though. You will still lose accuracy way faster than if you were fully aligned from the start. I have actually found that it's almost useless to do fixtaking with quick alignment, unless you do the trick where you use your own GPS coordinates, and even then it's questionable. It's a waste of time to find a spot and fly over it.  With no fix, the accuracy is good enough to navigate, but not good enough for anything tactical. Taking a fix basically doesn't change this.

 

As for the mission editor option that fixes this, there are two issues.

1. It's not under your control. If the server owner didn't bother to tick this, too bad. Also, some campaigns and missions don't use this option. Sometimes you can edit it yourself, but it's a pain.

2. The option is a definite cheat (rather than "simplification"), because it completely eliminates INU drift. That's not realistic behavior. Some people don't want that. 

 

How to fix this: Create an option to tick in the "Special" settings tab for the Ka-50. This will make you start with precise alignment, and have realistic drift without waiting. It will override the mission editor cheat for no drift at all. This should be fine to override, as it's less cheaty.

[Ephedrin]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb PawlaczGMD:

Fixtaking doesn't fix a poor alignment though. You will still lose accuracy way faster than if you were fully aligned from the start. I have actually found that it's almost useless to do fixtaking with quick alignment, unless you do the trick where you use your own GPS coordinates, and even then it's questionable. It's a waste of time to find a spot and fly over it.  With no fix, the accuracy is good enough to navigate, but not good enough for anything tactical. Taking a fix basically doesn't change this.

 

As for the mission editor option that fixes this, there are two issues.

1. It's not under your control. If the server owner didn't bother to tick this, too bad. Also, some campaigns and missions don't use this option. Sometimes you can edit it yourself, but it's a pain.

2. The option is a definite cheat (rather than "simplification"), because it completely eliminates INU drift. That's not realistic behavior. Some people don't want that. 

 

How to fix this: Create an option to tick in the "Special" settings tab for the Ka-50. This will make you start with precise alignment, and have realistic drift without waiting. It will override the mission editor cheat for no drift at all. This should be fine to override, as it's less cheaty.

The Harrier has that basically. You can skip alignment on servers based on your special settings. You don‘t really have any advantages but you don‘t have to wait. The setting is optional, those who want to wait can do it. Precision is the same.

Edited February 9 by Ephedrin

[PawlaczGMD]

4 hours ago, Ephedrin said:

The Harrier has that basically. You can skip alignment on servers based on your special settings. You don‘t really have any advantages but you don‘t have to wait. The setting is optional, those who want to wait can do it. Precision is the same.

 

I don't have the Harrier, but this sounds perfect.

[julian265]

On 2/8/2024 at 6:18 AM, zerO_crash said:

<snippety snip>

When it comes to this thread, DCS currently allows to deliver an experience both to purists, as well as those seeking more arcade. Asking ED to tailor it to a subjective time schedule, is highly irrelevant, and more so, lacking insight.

 

Either trolling or part of a minority in your views on this topic. Either way, whatever.

There's already the option you seem to want for "purists", but in MP servers it's just an extra step for the mission designer to remember to select the sensible option for this particular module... Which isn't always remembered. I don't care as much about the default setting in SP because I can control this myself.

[Schlingel mit Kringel]

I do not see the problem to be honest. There is an option in the mission editor to have either a casual or a realistic behaviour.

- If you want to buy a campaign, you can ask the settings beforehand on the forums and then buy it or leave it. No one is forcing anyone to buy something.
- For player made singleplayer missions, you can easily edit them to your liking in the mission editor. Takes five minutes if at all.
- And if you do not like how server admins design their missions: put in hundreds if not thousands of hours to build a mission to your liking, rent and pay for a server yourself and put in the hours to maintain everything. You can set settings to your liking.
- Or maybe write a kind email to the admin asking if the setting is intended as it is and best case if both options can be provided - and while doing so, maybe thank him for his valuable time and offering the server for 100% free or on voluntary donation basis. Instead of vocally demanding a global setting to just override him and by that potentially breaking how he intended his server to be played on.

Global options to override mission designer/server admin decisions is a no-go. Show some respect for other peoples time, dedication and work.
It would be a good idea though to have the setting shown in the multiplayer server list. So people do not need to connect to find out. +1 to this.

[zerO_crash]

On 2/11/2024 at 11:16 AM, julian265 said:

 

Either trolling or part of a minority in your views on this topic. Either way, whatever.

There's already the option you seem to want for "purists", but in MP servers it's just an extra step for the mission designer to remember to select the sensible option for this particular module... Which isn't always remembered. I don't care as much about the default setting in SP because I can control this myself.

 

If anyone is trolling, then obviously it's you! You have absolutely no information or metric on what is a minority/majority in this community. You are biased in your views, and obviously incompetent to perform a basic analysis/reasoning. Let me repeat myself one more time, this time, in simpler language: generally speaking, when you search up "flight game", you will not get DCS as a first, or even prominent hit. You find DCS by looking for a simulator (which this software prides itself to be). One joins a simulator, because one wants to simulate (in this case, according to realistic military aviation with all its components). Thus, it's logical to assume that most members of this community, seek realism as their priority number one! Now, that we have established that your arcade views of a simulator belong to the minority, we might infer even more. It would make logical sense to request something in favor of furthering realism, however asking to detract from it because you claim it "would be nice", is beyond recognition.

 

You make a further statement about what admins do and don't. Well, where did you even get that information from? Are you entitled to speak for admins, and on their behalf? Let's be frank, you have no idea about what server admins do or don't, and neither do you know if it is intentional or not. Let me school you a little. The preferred way of going about a situation like this, is submitting your request to the server admin. You only know what you want, but there will be others who want the opposite. A admin will seldomly change a given server setting, to suit a minority. Now, depending on what server you fly at, the mean on the server might or might not want for the same, therefore, contact the admin. As it stands, DCS is a trademark focused on realism (as far as possible), thus it would be against its interest, to suit your idea.

 

You already have the option to customize your perception on realism - I see no problem with it.

 

As to what Hobel mentioned with ground crew realistically preparing the aircraft for the pilot in most cases IRL, sure, true that. However, a proper system needs to be implemented to mitigate this shortcoming (a more advanced ground crew functionality - albeit still a server setting), rather than a quick one, which will prove difficult to work with/incompatible in the future. This is a discussion based on cost, manpower and time, used wrongly, on something that will need to be reworked in the future - i.e. bad business.

Edited February 13 by zerO_crash

[BIGNEWY]

folks keep the thread on topic. 

As stated if you have evidence it should be different feel free to PM me or @NineLine

thank you 

[Hobel]

vor 23 Stunden schrieb zerO_crash:

As to what Hobel mentioned with ground crew realistically preparing the aircraft for the pilot in most cases IRL, sure, true that. However, a proper system needs to be implemented to mitigate this shortcoming (a more advanced ground crew functionality - albeit still a server setting), rather than a quick one, which will prove difficult to work with/incompatible in the future. This is a discussion based on cost, manpower and time, used wrongly, on something that will need to be reworked in the future - i.e. bad business.

and as already mentioned this option is already available and can be seen as preparation, the server admins just have to set it up 

[unlikely_spider]

On 2/13/2024 at 7:33 AM, zerO_crash said:

when you search up "flight game", you will not get DCS as a first, or even prominent hit. You find DCS by looking for a simulator (which this software prides itself to be

Seems that has more to do with SEO and/or the popularity of competitive software than whether or not DCS is a simulator or a game (it is both).

Searching for "flight simulator" on Google does not net DCS in the top 15 results either. Also remember that DCS states itself that it is a game in its own description on their webpage.

[BIGNEWY]

thread is going off topic now. 

Again if you have evidence it should be different please PM one of us. 

thank you