Now What?

[power5]

I magically think that I should be dropping anything that flies and doesn't squawk the correct IFF signal, especially if it looks like it's going to go say hello to my ground forces.

 

Something about the F-15 'being made to do that' or something ... those who fly the targets can continue whining about how it isn't fair. I'm sure the ground troops don't feel it's fair, either :D

 

From what I read employing fc2 weapons is much easier than BS or a10. So to be in the same arena it's not fair for the no talent cherry picking fighter jets to pick on the more talented and realistic bs and wh drivers. :) << poking fun. when fighter jocks actually have to use a real radar they are welcome to come hunting for me.

[GGTharos]

You'll probably find that when you're flying a target, whether the other guy is using an FC2 flyable or a DCS flyable, it won't be making any difference to you :D

 

But, it gets better! More realistic Eagle Radar = see helicopters with rotors spinning. You don't even have to be hovering, you can be sitting on the ground. And oh, my, the notch filter options, not to mention the insane automation lacking from FC2 ... get the drift? ;)

[power5]

Yes but you will be flying a non radar hog for a couple years and forget all your fancy radar stuffs and be a sitting duck when dcs fighter is released. Then you will be mine. :)

 

if I can figure out how to shoot a missile by then.

[KeyCat]

But there will always be the need for patches you see. Especially I they keep upgrading old code, new code breaks old code rules and you require patches. Those take time, cost money and are in an infiniteloop. I'd rather they concentrate on future elements. I am an bid player of lomac and bs, but at some point a line must be drawn so we can move forward.

 

This may be sliding a bit off-topic but by your comment I assume you aren't affected by the memory handling bug/issue on 32-bit OS, right?

 

Note, I wrote "serious"... Personally I expect to be able to fly more than 45-60 minutes on a populated server without getting a CTD and I'm patiently waiting for a fix for both FC 2 and BS.

 

/KC

Edited October 15, 2010 by KeyCat

[Zenra]

Assuming ED is reading this for opinions, count me on the side for DCS compatibility with other DCS platforms and leave LOMAC/FC2 where it is. The latter is a fine low/medium level sim but I hope ED focuses on developing DCS modules going forward instead of splitting valuable resources to maintain FC2 compatibility.

[element1108]

This may be sliding a bit off-topic but by your comment I assume you aren't affected by the memory handling bug/issue on 32-bit OS, right?

 

Note, I wrote "serious"... Personally I expect to be able to fly more than 45-60 minutes on a populated server without getting a CTD and I'm patiently waiting for a fix for both FC 2 and BS.

 

/KC

 

I "probably" am considering I fly in Win XP 32 through bootcamp on a mac heheh. I haven't really had a CTD problem though even in populated servers. Maybe they're not populated enough or I just switch back and forth between BS and LOMAC before that time runs out...not sure.

 

That's a pain though no doubt.

 

Update to 64bit fix?

[ZQuickSilverZ]

Just play DCS in game mode.

 

I have never seen an online game use gamemode. I don't even know if you can run a server in gamemode. What does that have to do with integrating new people ino our hobby and getting them on the servers we play on? How does gamemode let me play with new people on the 104th server for instance?

 

Also, I am not suggesting that they keep FC 2.0 compatable forever. That is just silly. I am only suggesting that they wait until at least ONE fast mover is available. Otherwise were missing a huge aspect of modern air combat.

 

I would like to make another point about the FC 2.0 aircraft. Yes they may be easier to use but they are also a lot less capable. Don't you think all the extra things that you can do in the WHC make up for the WHA's ease of use? Some people prefer five speeds, some automatics.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

Keycat if you are not already in a squad please check out War Hawks Flight Squadron.

 

http://www.war-hawks.net/

 

I feel like you project qualities we look for in members and feel you would be a great addition to the squad.

 

Any others that are looking feel free to stop by and see what we have to offer.

[KeyCat]

I "probably" am considering I fly in Win XP 32 through bootcamp on a mac heheh. I haven't really had a CTD problem though even in populated servers. Maybe they're not populated enough or I just switch back and forth between BS and LOMAC before that time runs out...not sure.

 

That's a pain though no doubt.

 

Update to 64bit fix?

 

My ~45-60 min limit is when server has ~30+ players, if I fly on a server with less than 5 players I can fly longer before the CTD shows it's ugly face (it's seems partly related to GFX settings as well, higher settings fill up the RAM faster).

 

It's not really related to MP, I can reproduce the issue 100% of the time on my PC also in SP by just flying around with F11 external view long enough until simulator.exe reaches the ~1.34 GB RAM-usage mark.

 

Yes, to my knowledge going 64-bit is the only "workaround" for now but it's unfortunately not an option for me.

 

Keycat if you are not already in a squad please check out War Hawks Flight Squadron.

 

Thank you for the invite mate, I will check out your web-site.

 

/KC

[Spyros]

I'm happy as long as DCS modules are compatible.

 

If having to patch all the previous modules is a time consuming process, it could be better if there was basic DCS installation (eg. DCS-Base) and flyables would be installed to that, so you'd just have one DCS directory with everything in it.

The base installation could be upgraded independently of flyables, which would implement interfaces to use the engine's features (eg. abstract aircraft systems, cockpit interaction etc).

 

Anyway, I don't know how DCS made, so it could be already done this way.

 

As far as FC2 compatibility is concerned, I think it would be better to focus time and resources on DCS, to release more flyables.

I might miss the Su-25 because it was the toughest to fly, but the DCS flyables are tougher, so I can live without it. :)

On the other hand, MP missions with many aircraft roles (CAS, Fighter Sweep etc) are possible on FC, but we already have a helicopter and an airplane on DCS, with more to come.

 

On next DCS module priority, I'd love to see a 2 seater (eg. Apache, F-111 or Russian equivalents), as it's great fun to be on the same airplane or helicopter with a friend. I think it would be a great feature for the DCS engine.

On the other hand, a fighter would fill the gap of FC2 and bring more player roles to MP.

 

Personally, I'm happy with any flyable, as long as it's as close to reality as possible and that's DCS' goal isn't it?

Edited October 16, 2010 by Spyros

[astrospud]

We use ED product. Not EA product.

I'm more than happy to fly the A10C in a coop without the fear of being popped by an airqua...

ahem! ...opposing player in a Flanker.

 

I hesitate to join a server these days (in my KA50) if there are more players in a CAP role (FC2) than in CAS or SEAD roles.

 

I have to say that I agree with Mowers POV, as well as Crunch's.

 

At times I enjoy coop Hokum missions with great spanking air battles overhead.

 

I also enjoy surviving, esp. after a 3 minutes startup and 10 minute flight time.

 

I'll still happily fly the warthog, regardless of it's compatibility with FC2 or not.

Edited October 16, 2010 by astrospud

[Griffin]

I'm okay with dropping the FC2 but the compatibility issues don't stop there. If they made a "core sim" to which all the modules would be installed it would have been much easier even if it would have taken alot more time. Quite like the MSFS series, adding new aircraft and updating the main core of the sim as necessary.

It's going to be a headache for them in a few years to update all the modules to be online compatible let alone fixing the major bugs in older modules as they don't have time to do that these days either.

I think I said quite a while ago that someday they will have to deal with DCS: Nightmare. I hope they have some tricks up their sleeves.

[Aliboy]

Most guys in my squadron have already moved to DCS-A-10C and are enjoying learning and flying the hog together but all of them including others I meet online agree that both the games are different experiences and there will still be plenty of FC2 players around at least till DCS:Supersonic Fighter is released.

 

As for the guys who call FC2 players "Airquakers" I disagree with you FC2 is easy to learn but its very hard to master because you have to constantly adapt and create new tactics and counter-tactics especially when you are flying against good squadrons...It takes a lot of practice and teamwork to get things right and when even the simplest of squadron tactics go right for you its an incredibly rewarding experience.

[Panzertard]

Stop worrying so much. Start enjoying more. ;)

We'll adapt - on servers, in squads, on teamspeak, in singleplayer.

[Cali]

 

As for the guys who call FC2 players "Airquakers" I disagree with you FC2 is easy to learn but its very hard to master because you have to constantly adapt and create new tactics and counter-tactics especially when you are flying against good squadrons...It takes a lot of practice and teamwork to get things right and when even the simplest of squadron tactics go right for you its an incredibly rewarding experience.

 

FC2 is not hard to master, all you have to do is be smart and not act like Rambo. A lot of the times you see people not in a squad flying, they are mostly the easy ones to kill, besides a few. People need to join comms to have a better and fun flying experience. Even the copters can fly in the danger zone when they are on comms and have cover.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

Cali I think what he was saying is that its easy to go fly around and shoot things (easy to learn). The mastery comes from working as a team with other people. Thats always a trick to do in ANY game (hard to master). Especially when the number of people increases and they are using different equipment (different types of jets and a helo). Your obviously used to working with a team (3SQN). You have had time to pull your squad together. It's not so easy to work as a team for some people especially if they are really inexperienced with flight sims and get lost in the complexity.

[element1108]

Stop worrying so much. Start enjoying more. ;)

We'll adapt - on servers, in squads, on teamspeak, in singleplayer.

 

That's a good point...stop worrying and enjoy! We're always looking 50 steps ahead and never on the what we have now. I never thought I'd have the chance to fly DCS A-10C before Christmas, I also NEVER thought DCS Black Shark would be made compatible with LOCKON. We've been given loads of "surprises" that have really gone above expectations for many and I think we just ride out that wave and enjoy what we have now.

 

Sitting here speculating on the distant future of this series is pointless (IMO). But if you all enjoy doing that more than playing, that's cool! :)

[Cali]

Cali I think what he was saying is that its easy to go fly around and shoot things (easy to learn). The mastery comes from working as a team with other people. Thats always a trick to do in ANY game (hard to master). Especially when the number of people increases and they are using different equipment (different types of jets and a helo). Your obviously used to working with a team (3SQN). You have had time to pull your squad together. It's not so easy to work as a team for some people especially if they are really inexperienced with flight sims and get lost in the complexity.

 

There are some people that aren't in squads that are really good. Yes, being in a squad helps. But to get good all you really need to do is practice and have some sort of skill. Playing online isn't just about getting kills, that's a lot of people's problem. They just want to get kills. It's about staying alive, trying not to get yourself in the position that you can be killed. That will not happen all the time and you will die, nothing you can do about that. But mastering a jet is about practice and more practice and then apply what you learned and have seen.

[Steel Jaw]

That's just the problem with the air quakers: they often do not care about getting killed, and they're back in their lte weight jets in a blink of an eye.

 

Edited October 16, 2010 by Mower

[Cali]

That's just the problem with the air quakers: they often do not care about getting killed, and they're back in their lte weight jets in a blink of an eye.

 

 

The same thing is going to happen when a DCS fighter is released. There will be a quick start-up. They will learn how to arm their system and fire missiles. Just because we will have all these buttons and neat precedures doesn't mean AQ is going to stop. It has been around for years and will be around for many more years. DCS-BS isn't hard to hop into, fly to the target area and kill some things....now is it?

 

I just learned how to fly BS a few months ago and I do pretty well for myself.

[RIPTIDE]

With the A10A already present and accounted for in LockOn, what rational argument can be presented for integration of the A10C?

lol. Because what you are saying then is that there is no advantage to having DCS:A-10C over FC2 A-10A. oh dear... :helpsmilie:

[RIPTIDE]

That's just the problem with the air quakers: they often do not care about getting killed, and they're back in their lte weight jets in a blink of an eye.

 

Damn Mower/Bramage. You keep banging on. Sounds like sour grapes to me with the MP FC2.0 experience. Say it isn't true. :D

[159th_Viper]

lol. Because what you are saying then is that there is no advantage to having DCS:A-10C over FC2 A-10A. oh dear... :helpsmilie:

 

:doh:

 

You keep believing that ;)

[Grimes]

Not to say it is the correct move, but didnt FC2 take so long because of how much has changed between FC1.12 and Black Shark, if Black Shark and FC2 are technically quite similar now, wouldn't it take about the same workload to make both products compatible with A-10C? While I do appreciate the effort put into FC2 it seems like a lost cause to do a ton of work on it to bring it compatible with Black Shark, only to basically abandon it 9 months later once A10 is released.

 

Sorry crunch, I might mention the word "airquake" abit as I discuss online play.

 

Grimes' definition of airquake (adj) - Playing any Eagle Dynamics game online where the play is not organized by either the players or through the game itself.

 

Being organized by the players = playing a pre-planned co-op, scheduled event, and/or flying on comms.

 

Being organized through the game = A system that currently doesn't exist within any Eagle Dynamics product that helps guide players to fulfill various dynamic tasks.

 

Even flying just Black Shark online felt alittle bit like airquake. Granted a good old fashioned "comp-stomp" is probably the more accurate term. For those wondering, a comp-stomp is a game where you play against enemy AI who generally have little chance of winning. Playing against the AI in a "join in progress" style game... well its impossible to lose. So the co-ops become a procedure of sorts. Take off, clear point A, fly to point B, Clear Point B.... and any step can be easily reached again if you get shot down, it just takes longer.

 

and once again online play is boring.

 

FC2 online play at least had challenging aspects to it, part of the allure is the different combination which you can fight an enemy in. F15 vs Su27 or Su33 or Mig29A or Mig29S each play out differently and your tactics have got to be different. Not to mention you are fighting human players. If only they had the built in tools to transform the fights away from airquake.

[RIPTIDE]

:doh:

 

You keep believing that ;)

Your words. ;)