What did I think of Kiowa? It needs to improve in some areas!

[Dav IRL]

It looks nice and flies nicer; I will hold out from getting too critical at this early stage of its release. The field of view is fantastic, but the targeting pod is lethal. The cockpit lighting is excellent, too. I have no regrets, but there is room for fidelity. 

[YoYo]

9 minutes ago, Yurgon said:

Such a fascinating discussion.

Is there room for improvement? Sure, there always is. Interestingly enough, I think some of the buttons and panels in the cockpit might do with a few more polygons and maybe better textures, especially towards the overhead and back panels. The external model? Looks amazing to me! If this was ARMA and we'd be walking right next to a KW, sure, it would probably be nice if it had a higher level of detail. But in DCS? I have to zoom in all the way for the textures and the 3D model to not look great. Which I tend to do like once or twice, the rest of the time I sit in the cockpit, stare at the gauges and fly the thing.

It also sounds good to me. Can't say the sound-scape blows my mind, but there's also absolutely nothing wrong with it as far as I can tell. Maybe it's my headset? My sound settings (which are like 98% default)? My bad ears? Hard to tell. It just sounds really good to me.

For several hours I've been flashed by how great this release is in my opinion, how many systems are included, how well they work, and how totally awesome the flight model is and how much fun it is to fly in MP and to use the KW to its strengths.

And here's a thread with players saying they'll hold off on purchasing because of, almost literally, rivet counting?

I just wish you guys could feel how much fun it is to fly the KW.

And disclaimer, I'm not getting paid to say any of this, I really just think Polychop did a fantastic job with this module and it's among the best and most finished releases in DCS history. Again, there's room for improvement, there always is. But I feel players who're unhappy about the KW will be unhappy about anything and everything.

The problem is that it's not EA, and yet it turns out that it is EA, maybe close to RC but not without problems. People paying full price rather expect to have everything perfect, because it's not EA. I think it would be safer to adopt a slightly different policy at the start, I suppose.

[CaptJodan]

I feel it's a bit too early for me to be giving any opinion as I haven't had a ton of time with the module, so everyone can take this with a grain of salt, but...

I've found myself pleasantly surprised, enjoying the flight model far more than I was thinking I would.  It has its own quirks, not near the power I'm used to with other modules when fully loaded, and just feels like a scrappy aircraft, but fun to fly.  

There are issues, as there always are.  Some of the things I've tripped over are damage modeling, especially with devastating crashes into the ground.  I see the lesser textures but honestly they don't bother me that much.  I'm sure I'll see more in the coming days and weeks, but my initial impressions are not negative.  

I can contrast this way the opening days of the Gazelle and my utter loathing of that module, and I'm happy that I took a second risk with Polychop and wasn't left with the same feeling I had then.  This heli has a chance to not be a hanger queen the way I thought it might be, but time will tell as I learn more about it.  

[freehand]

41 minutes ago, ThorBrasil said:

If he jumps off the bridge, will you jump too?

You was doing so well then you responded with this...

[CaptJodan]

3 minutes ago, YoYo said:

The problem is that it's not EA, and yet it turns out that it is EA, maybe close to RC but not without problems. People paying full price rather expect to have everything perfect, because it's not EA. I think it would be safer to adopt a slightly different policy at the start, I suppose.

If you're looking for perfect, you're in the wrong hobby.  

[Japo32]

what it worries me.. is that it is too easy to fly. Don't get me wrong.. if Kasmo says that it is the best simulation out there, then perfect, BUT I managed in the past the Dreamfoild XPlane Bell 407 and you had to sweat blood to make a hover with the same nervous hellicopter.

[LorenLuke]

55 minutes ago, ThorBrasil said:

There appears to be a texture problem.

I'm not going to stop anyone from buying. Everyone knows what they do with their money.

If he jumps off the bridge, will you jump too?

I mean, I like flying my modules from the cockpit, but you do you. 

[dresoccer4]

1 minute ago, LorenLuke said:

I mean, I like flying my modules from the cockpit, but you do you. 

these sorts of comments always make me chuckle. so you'd be fine if there wasn't an exterior model at all

[LorenLuke]

Just now, dresoccer4 said:

these sorts of comments always make me chuckle. so you'd be fine if there wasn't an exterior model at all

Didn't say that. But I know that if I'm close enough to sniff the polygons, I'm probably going to get about one frame to see, process, analyse, and criticise it before I disappear in a midair collision. So I can stomach a moderately subpar tenth of a second, compared to the enjoyment of actually flying and fighting the thing.

I buy modules to play, not to polish them and put them on a shelf next to a sunny window.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

23 minutes ago, Japo32 said:

what it worries me.. is that it is too easy to fly. Don't get me wrong.. if Kasmo says that it is the best simulation out there, then perfect, BUT I managed in the past the Dreamfoild XPlane Bell 407 and you had to sweat blood to make a hover with the same nervous hellicopter.

Does the Bell 407 have the same stability augmentation system?

If you look at Casmo’s FB page, there’s a recent post on there which drew another RL military helicopter pilot to the comments section, and he also called the module realistic.

[Yurgon]

1 minute ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Does the Bell 407 have the same stability augmentation system?

With SCAS off I think the KW is still pretty easy to fly.

Maybe a little twitchier than the Huey. I'd say ballpark-wise it feels great with SCAS on and pretty solid with it off.

[poochies]

70 bucks well spent in my view flew it all afternoon and love it first module i didn't have to mess with curves and stuff flies like a dream easy to slow down and get in a hover it's a cream puff compared to oh-6a and even apache which still to this day after 100's of hours in it  i still can't takeoff without it going wonky in yaw or sticking to ground and wanting to tip maybe that is a dcs'ism but didn't have that issue once today with kiowa on tarmac or grass or dirt maybe it is too easy to fly but please don't mess with FM it' got a good mix of having to fly it to hold a hover versus being locked in 

[Hell0]

Yea but is it good at blowing <profanity> up?

[ThorBrasil]

1 hour ago, Jarhead0331 said:

That is a pretty bone-headed comment. The guy flew Kiowas for over 10 years and has commented that he likes it and that it rivals and in some areas even surpasses anything they had in the Army to train with. What are your bonafides, being a career complainer?

My friend, I apologize if you were offended. Maybe it's the difference in culture, because in my culture people don't get offended by what I said. I'll try to explain better. I have nothing against Casmo and I admire him for having flown a Kiowa and even an Apache. The way you referred to him is that whatever he says, you will accept blindly. You won't question anything, argue, ask questions. I'm not talking about the systems, because I know that Kiowa must be representing them faithfully. In all of his videos, the product presented would be a developer version and did not represent the final product, but all the defects that I pointed out were visible in his videos and in the end we received the same product. So once again, I didn't mean to offend him.

51 minutes ago, freehand said:

You was doing so well then you responded with this...

Sorry, but it was all just a misunderstanding.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

I’ll just leave this here:

If the FM is good enough for someone who flew the real thing for 2000 hours, it’s good enough for me.

Of course there’s always room for improvement, so we’ll see what PolyChop will do to the module during the next few months/years

[Japo32]

43 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Does the Bell 407 have the same stability augmentation system?

If you look at Casmo’s FB page, there’s a recent post on there which drew another RL military helicopter pilot to the comments section, and he also called the module realistic.

Seen the SCAS system!! I think the Bell407 didn't have it. Without it is more challenging for sure. Have to fly more to see differences. Thanks!

[ThorBrasil]

14 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

I’ll just leave this here:

If the FM is good enough for someone who flew the real thing for 2000 hours, it’s good enough for me.

Of course there’s always room for improvement, so we’ll see what PolyChop will do to the module during the next few months/years

I'm glad I didn't complain about the FM. 
In fact, it is very easy to fly the Kiowa. It is the easiest helicopter to fly in the DCS. So easy that I even wonder if it has the EFM.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/general/#1512209

Edited June 5, 2024 by ThorBrasil

[__Mad__]

1 hour ago, YoYo said:

Ahh, ok I see it,  but overall it looks similar to AH-64 and the animation itself is very ok.

 

Nope, not even close.

[poochies]

ONe thing I've noticed is i can be sitting in a hover and all of a sudden i'm climbing on my vsi like a gust of wind my torque was unchanged it just climbs anyone else seen this 

44 minutes ago, Hell0 said:

Yea but is it good at blowing <profanity> up?

yes but grease mark seems off a bit !

[jubuttib]

6 hours ago, ThorBrasil said:

4 - There is no damage model like the Mi-8, Huey, Apache among others. You can see in the video that the aircraft is indestructible.

Don't know how you managed that, I just got shot down by an Mi-28 (short burst took out my avionics and made my engines shut down) and, autogyro landing not working out properly for me on this attempt, my helicopter exploded upon impact with ground.

[Yurgon]

51 minutes ago, poochies said:

ONe thing I've noticed is i can be sitting in a hover and all of a sudden i'm climbing on my vsi like a gust of wind my torque was unchanged it just climbs

I've seen something very similar to what you describe. It's already reported.

52 minutes ago, poochies said:

yes but grease mark seems off a bit !

Adjust it so it isn't off anymore.

[LuseKofte]

I really believe this site looks more and more like Facebook comments. 
If someone feel they should not have payed full price for it. Why the h…. did they do it then?

I have seen pictures for month, seen all the videos. To me it looked very similar. I find it well modelled and the poly’s I see , I did see on the videos. I even got to see a long video of a satisfied real Kiowa pilot flying this thing. 
Not a thing was a surprise to me. 
This is a solid piece of software and I will learn everything about it. This is going to be fun

Edited June 6, 2024 by LuseKofte

[NAM]

Textures/Animations looks fine to me.

Little bit suprised how stable it is. However, it is ideal to explore beautiful nordic countries in kola map.

 

[Slippa]

I love the shape of it.

Looking at it in the sim it looks alright. If I zoom right in and start inspecting it I s’pose it isn’t great but using it was fine. It is easy to fly and made me look a shed-load better than I do in some other choppers. I enjoyed the vid too of the experienced pilot giving us the rundown and though I wouldn’t follow him off a bridge, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt about the FM. Wonder if they’re that easy IRL though?

Barely had a lot of time in it but I want some more. The sounds do need a bit of sorting though for me. I’m not the first to mention it obviously so hope for an update or whatever.

[Dangerzone]

7 hours ago, ThorBrasil said:

One thing is for sure. I will never buy another product from Polychop. It's the first and the last.

If I recall correctly, most of what you have mentioned here, you mentioning previous in other threads watching youtube videos before release, so you were aware of the texture quality and animations. Why did you decide to buy immediately, and not even wait 24hrs after release - without first confirming that your concerns had been addressed, and then come out surprised and deeply regretful of what you purchased as though you did not have that prior knowledge? 

I'm also interested to know what do you think non-EA means? My understanding is that it's supposed to be feature complete. It doesn't mean it's perfect, without bugs, or with no improvements to come. There are many non-EA aircraft in DCS still being improved. I have the same expectation with this. I think the simple solution here is for a clearer understanding of expectations of what a non-EA module is supposed to have vs your perceived expectations. 

As someone who hasn't purchased yet, I was interested in your review. That quickly changed after seeing the way you've responded. The only concern remaining now from what I've read from you that is a factor is the damage module. And that's a legit concern. However the other comments and reactions you've given quickly have me questioning your "It's indestructible" claim and the credibility of the review, because of the perceived emotion and negative bias towards PC to start with. 

And if the damage modelling is truly flawed to the point of it being indestructible, why are you blaming solely PC and not including ED? This is as much on ED/DCS as it is Polychop if it's this bad. It should have been picked up on by DCS and the beta testers, and if it was, release should have been halted until it was fixed. If it wasn't picked up on, maybe you have discovered a bug in the damage module that hasn't been noticed before, and if so - I'm sure it will be addressed. 

It would seem that instead of "I will never buy again from...", a more reasonable approach may be "I will never buy again within x days of release". You may save yourself a lot of disappointment and pain from any dev, not just PC by simply waiting for a release in the wild for a day or two and seeing what is right and what's left to be done, especially if your expectations is higher than most, and if you've already picked up on issues prior to the release. 

The one thing I am interested in from you is how you go with your refund request. If you're really as concerned and disappointed as your post indicates with your 'never again' approach to PC - it would make sense that you regret your decision and want your money back. The best chance of that is to apply for an immediate refund not even 24hrs out. I'm interested to know how smoothly this goes, especially if you purchased direct and not from steam.