Hope for another FC2 compatibility patch

[Adder1606688006]

The big question is what happens to the community during the two years minimum wait (assuming they do a US bvr capable jet next and then a Russian one) to get to a point similar to what we have now in terms on online play. Whilst some people will happily buy every DCS and spend the year playing it, others are only interested in certain types (the fighter jocks, mud movers, US fanboys and their Russian counterparts :p)

 

The great thing about DCS-FC2 compatibility is that it will keep the ED community playing together for as long as it takes for DCS to equal and overtake FC2 in terms of the breadth of gameplay styles catered for.

[VTJS17_Fire]

I understand that argument. But what's the reason?

I'll need 10-15 minutes to start up my DCS Hog/ fixed wing aircraft and short after T/O, I'll shot down by a FC 3.0 player, who needs 2 minutes to spool up his arcarde jet.

 

 

And if the next DCS module will be a fighter, I think FC and DCS won't be compatible. I think the DCS fighter? will have a very advanced radar, maybe and hopefully IFF interrogation and such things. And on the other hand, you have these FC fighters with its simple radar and missing avionics.

 

 

Last but not least: I'm enjoying FC 2.0 very well in my squadron. But only there. There are bugs since LOMAC 1, which weren't fixed with FC 2.0 (HSI for example) and some new bugs. I think these bugs won't be fixed with a new upgrade to DCS: Warthog.

 

 

So, for me FC is dead. When the first DCS fighter comes out, I hope and think the VJS-161 will move to DCS, even if we all fly the same aircraft.

 

 

kind regards,

Fire

Edited February 27, 2011 by VTJG17_Fire

[Boberro]

I understand that argument. But what's the reason?

I'll need 10-15 minutes to start up my DCS Hog/ fixed wing aircraft and short after T/O, I'll shot down by a FC 3.0 player, who needs 2 minutes to spool up his arcarde jet.

 

And the point is? :) Who takes off to be killed 2 mins later? If you did that you would be killed in DCS and in LO. In both :)

Edited February 27, 2011 by Boberro

[EtherealN]

10-15 minutes is a bit on the slow side... And remember - if you are really in a hurry, you can do a lot of your alignment in-flight if you just set the CDU correctly. You'll be airborne in ~2 minutes. ;)

 

And as Boberro said: don't fly to be killed. Fly to survive and kill.

[Dr_Arrow]

Maybe it would be sufficient to port the Su-25A/T/ into DCS.

[GGTharos]

No, it wouldn't be sufficient, nor is it currently on the roadmap.

[Boberro]

Maybe it would be sufficient to port the Su-25A/T/ into DCS.

 

Yeah it would be great, wouldn't it?

[*Rage*]

What a complete waste of time trying to make an outdated lite weight mesh with a modern hardcore. You want fighter cover? Let ED make us a DCS fighter now.

 

FC2 is of no account.

 

No account to you perhaps. It is still the mainstay of competitive online play and there are many fine servers, squads and online pilots that might disagree with you.

[*Rage*]

The big question is what happens to the community during the two years minimum wait (assuming they do a US bvr capable jet next and then a Russian one) to get to a point similar to what we have now in terms on online play. Whilst some people will happily buy every DCS and spend the year playing it, others are only interested in certain types (the fighter jocks, mud movers, US fanboys and their Russian counterparts :p)

 

The great thing about DCS-FC2 compatibility is that it will keep the ED community playing together for as long as it takes for DCS to equal and overtake FC2 in terms of the breadth of gameplay styles catered for.

 

+1

[159th_Viper]

...It is still the mainstay of competitive online play and there are many fine servers, squads and online pilots that might disagree with you.

 

And how will that change with the A10C?

 

I'll tell you: It will not.

 

FC2 has it's place in the Community and nothing will change that. What will however be counter-productive is the introduction of the A10C into the FC2 environment.

 

Why?

 

1 - Already an A10 present. Why another?

 

2 - How many dedicated Bomber-Pilots are there in FC2? Minority, even more so dedicated exclusively to the T-Toad and it's AFM. FC2 fast-jet jockeys will just be salivating at the 'easy-kill' A10C's and tailor their game-play, alienating the A10C pilots accordingly.

 

3 - Attempted integration of the SFM of FC2 flyables with the AFM/WAFM of the A10C is just a bad idea - fullstop.

 

 

Above just a coupla of reasons......Akin to mixing Oil with Water if you ask me: Might make pretty patterns but it just gets messy.

[Steel Jaw]

No account to you perhaps. It is still the mainstay of competitive online play and there are many fine servers, squads and online pilots that might disagree with you.

 

Agreed and that is fine.

 

But FC2 is a lite weight outting encouraging a certain style of play that is counter to the hardcore flying of the DCS A10C...I dont intend to spend 20 minutes planning a mission, 15 minutes getting spun up and into the air, only to be shot down by an air quaker who took about 2 minutes getting airborne.

[Steel Jaw]

FC2 -DCS is "a must" for reasons which have been repeated dozen times before ^^

 

Nope: it's trying to mix oil and water...no point, not gonna happen, I do not wish to see DCS dev resources WASTED on this.

[Steel Jaw]

I'll need 10-15 minutes to start up my DCS Hog/ fixed wing aircraft and short after T/O, I'll shot down by a FC 3.0 player, who needs 2 minutes to spool up his arcarde jet.

 

Precisely.

 

Besides which, I have no desire to see a modern product like A10C degraded at the alter of compatability with FC2, an aging LITEWEIGHT product.

 

I will say it again: the 2 communities, FC2 and A10C are very DIFFERENT. We will not mesh well.

[VTJS17_Fire]

And the point is? Who takes off to be killed 2 mins later? If you did that you would be killed in DCS and in LO. In both

 

FC2 fast-jet jockeys will just be salivating at the 'easy-kill' A10C's and tailor their game-play, alienating the A10C pilots accordingly.

 

 

While I try to simulate as deep as I can, the FC jockey knows, he needs only 2 minutes at each start up and risks more for that easy A-10C kill, IMO. Would he fly an aircraft with the same effort at start up, engagement etc., he would fly much more carefully, IMO.

 

I don't know how BS jockeys flying in FC think about such situations.

 

 

kind regards,

Fire

[joey45]

They should consentrat on getting BS and WH to play nicely together..

[Steel Jaw]

Oh and besides which as has already been pointed out...

 

FC2 already has an A10.

[Distiler]

I will say it again: the 2 communities, FC2 and A10C are very DIFFERENT. We will not mesh well.

 

lol. Buddie, FC2 community is exactly the same as for A10C. Wanna split it again like it was when DCS:Ka-50 was not compatible?

 

It's ALL about community.

[Steel Jaw]

lol. Buddie, FC2 community is exactly the same as for A10C.

 

Not in my experience on the FC2 servers for damn near a YEAR until A10C came out in beta. There were a few who took the flying seriously but many, many, air quakers. So, IMHO, based upon what I saw personally, you are wrong. ;)

 

There's a very specific reason why the hardcore online squads never adopted FC2.

 

Reminds me of the laughable and patheticly ignorant remarks Andy Mahood made in a recent PC Lamer...err, PC Gamer March 2011 about the complexity of FC2 that would satisfly even hardcore simmers.

 

Let's be honest about what each sim is about: FC2 is a survey sim, A10C is a study sim, they cannot coexist.

 

As always and forever more, I call it the way I see it.

Edited February 27, 2011 by Mower

[Distiler]

Not in my experience on the FC2 servers for damn near a YEAR until A10C came out in beta. There were a few who took the flying seriously but many, many, air quakers. So, IMHO, based upon what I saw personally, you are wrong. ;)

 

Public servers will always be public and open to quakers and not quakers, yes you'll see quakers in dcs:a-10c too. Now go out and check the myriad of squad forums and closed/non public servers and tell me they are different communities.

You'r looking at the thing from a technical point of view and what do you think the product is done for, but it's mainly a community issue. Get more DCS modules in the market as replacement and only then you'll be safe putting FC2 to sleep. You're risking loosing community (going to other simulators and forgetting about ED).

Edited February 27, 2011 by Distiler

[159th_Falcon]

I agree whit Joey.

 

First make KA50 and A10C compatible, then see how far DCS: fixed wing is along and if there is a need for an FC2 compatibility patch.

 

Though, i think it would be fun to have KA50 vs A10C whit FC2 fighters for air cover.

[Steel Jaw]

In DCS A10C the AI flies Air Cover and SEAD support. For now, Im okay with that.

[Boberro]

And how will that change with the A10C?

 

I'll tell you: It will not.

 

FC2 has it's place in the Community and nothing will change that. What will however be counter-productive is the introduction of the A10C into the FC2 environment.

 

Why?

 

1 - Already an A10 present. Why another?

 

2 - How many dedicated Bomber-Pilots are there in FC2? Minority, even more so dedicated exclusively to the T-Toad and it's AFM. FC2 fast-jet jockeys will just be salivating at the 'easy-kill' A10C's and tailor their game-play, alienating the A10C pilots accordingly.

 

3 - Attempted integration of the SFM of FC2 flyables with the AFM/WAFM of the A10C is just a bad idea - fullstop.

 

 

Above just a coupla of reasons......Akin to mixing Oil with Water if you ask me: Might make pretty patterns but it just gets messy.

 

How can you say introduction A-10C could be counter-productive? It's just another plane very well made which would fly with old brother as same as grandpa Su-25 with a little newer Su-25T. Except a really little longer Charlie's spool time (for some people it is painful...) there is nothing which would be bad to introduce A-10C to its brother in LO2 as same as it has been made between Ka-50 and LO2.

 

Agreed and that is fine.

 

But FC2 is a lite weight outting encouraging a certain style of play that is counter to the hardcore flying of the DCS A10C...I dont intend to spend 20 minutes planning a mission, 15 minutes getting spun up and into the air, only to be shot down by an air quaker who took about 2 minutes getting airborne.

 

Nobody would stay next to you with an axe forcing you to play on server with Charlies. Don't like server? Don't play it but allow people having fun flying in coop together who wouldn't be mad if they were shot down even after "20 minutes planning a mission". ;)

 

Precisely.

 

Besides which, I have no desire to see a modern product like A10C degraded at the alter of compatability with FC2, an aging LITEWEIGHT product.

 

I will say it again: the 2 communities, FC2 and A10C are very DIFFERENT. We will not mesh well.

 

Degraded? Who degrades it? I don't know what A-10C would waste on compability with LO2

Edited February 27, 2011 by Boberro

[159th_Viper]

It's just another plane very well made which would fly with old brother as same as grandpa Su-25 with a little newer Su-25T.

 

There's the fatal mistake/error in reasoning: You cannot compare 25/25T with A10A/A10C (Survey SIM/SurveySIM vs Survey SIM/Study SIM).

 

And no, it's not just the spool-time that's relevant. It's the entire process, from Ramp-Start to Ingress, Fencing in/Fencing out, Egress and RTB......

 

Absolutely everything takes longer because it has to be done properly: There's no majik 'One-button lock and fire' process et al. At the end of the day it all adds up and with the Virtual Pilot workload in the A10C not being recriprocated by the other Airframes there's bound to be a Conflict.....Bottom-Line: A10C stands to lose.

 

Again, I have yet to hear a constructive argument for the inclusion of the A10C when we already have the A10A in FC2. And no, the 25/25T comparison is not relevant (SEAD distinction etc etc): Different Airframes for different purposes, unlike the A vs C which basically amounts to an 'Upgrade' of sorts.

[garengarch]

Personally, I would hate to think DCS-next would be delayed by 6 months/1 year while they work on a compatibilty patch....I'm nearer death at every release - may not have many left :)

[Boberro]

Absolutely everything takes longer because it has to be done properly: There's no majik 'One-button lock and fire' process et al. At the end of the day it all adds up and with the Virtual Pilot workload in the A10C not being recriprocated by the other Airframes there's bound to be a Conflict.....Bottom-Line: A10C stands to lose.

 

--- Is there anyone who would force someone to play Charlie in LO? No. It would have been played only by those who want that. So.... ;)