wolf_288 Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Hi Vill A-10C Warthog be online compatible with Flaming Cliffs 2.0? 1
Skkuda Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 AFAIK.....no. different levels of fidelity that I think it shouldnt be mixed. [sIGPIC]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic56197_1.gif[/sIGPIC] AMD Phenom IIx4 955 Black Edition@3.2Ghz Asus M4A785TD-M EVO 6Ghz DDR3 1033 NVidia Geforce GTX 570 hd1280 Mb GDDR5
MTFDarkEagle Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Sorry, but you have got to be kidding me... http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=67747 This question has been asked 139357438 times already... Lukas - "TIN TIN" - 9th Shrek Air Strike Squadron TIN TIN's Cockpit thread
uri_ba Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 so far, BS and FC2 are compatible. I don't see a difference between WH and BS in realism. AFAIK, BS will get a compatibility patch with WH later this year, but no strict timeline exists yet, WH need some more ironing (that was from an interview with WAGS in one of the sites). once BS and HW are compatible, according to the same interview, FC2 compatibility would be considered. problem is that with every DCS module, FC2 would have more advantage due to system simplicity. you can see it now with A10A vs A10C. life are much simpler in FC2. (but it's so much less effective) Creator of Hound ELINT script My pit building blog Few DIY projects on Github: DIY Cougar throttle Standalone USB controller | DIY FCC3 Standalone USB Controller
rattler Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 What happened to each module will be compatible with future modules idea? Not talking FC2. Am I wrong. I thought each DCS module woud be compatible with the next. One of the purposes of doing modules. Just a question guys. That was my thought so maybe I have it all wrong. If wrong, no problem, just nice to know info for future. I know you are doing a patch and great. I am holding off for a while till things settle down with new release and yes I will purchase a10 and patiently waiting for fixed wing fighter, what ever it is..:thumbup:
Garfieldo Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 What happened to each module will be compatible with future modules idea? Not talking FC2. Am I wrong. I thought each DCS module woud be compatible with the next. One of the purposes of doing modules. Just a question guys. That was my thought so maybe I have it all wrong. If wrong, no problem, just nice to know info for future. I know you are doing a patch and great. I am holding off for a while till things settle down with new release and yes I will purchase a10 and patiently waiting for fixed wing fighter, what ever it is..:thumbup: FC2 is not a DCS module. The first module of the DCS series was the HokumPokum. 1
empeck Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 The first module of the DCS series was the HokumPokum. :megalol:
sobek Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 What happened to each module will be compatible with future modules idea? Nothing, it's still valid. But developing the engine and making the modules compatible out of the box is not possible, so the patch approach it is. Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives!
92nd-MajorBug Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 FC2 would have more advantage due to system simplicity. you can see it now with A10A vs A10C. life are much simpler in FC2. (but it's so much less effective) Just like you said, if you give the same mission to A-10As and A-10Cs, I'm confident that the A-10Cs will complete it faster and with fewer losses ;) A 3 minutes gain on rampstart doesn't mean much, in the end it's eyeball mk1 vs Litening, eyeball mk1 vs MWS, eyeball mk1 vs SADL, etc :P 92nd Kodiak Air Force - May the Greuh be with you
xjiks Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 No need to have FC2 compatibilty, because the next module will be the F-18, it's an all-in-one plane ! :music_whistling: sorry :poster_offtopic::megalol: L'important n'est pas de tuer, mais de survivre. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] if you read this you are too curious
Wayc00lio Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 once BS and HW are compatible What, Hogwarts? Is Harry Potter exchanging his broomstick for an A10? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Asus ROG Rampage Extreme VI; i9 7900X (all 10 cores at 4.5GHz); 32 Gb Corsair Dominator DDR4; EVGA 1080Ti Hybrid; 1Tb Samsung 960 Evo M2; 2Tb Samsung 850 Pro secondary. Oculus Rift; TM Warthog; Saitek Combat Pros.
Boberro Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 I hope it will... it would be the best for company :smartass: Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D ಠ_ಠ ツ
Nico.pt Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Just like you said, if you give the same mission to A-10As and A-10Cs, I'm confident that the A-10Cs will complete it faster and with fewer losses ;) A 3 minutes gain on rampstart doesn't mean much, in the end it's eyeball mk1 vs Litening, eyeball mk1 vs MWS, eyeball mk1 vs SADL, etc :P If no slot for a A-10A in the misson... no problem...
Speed Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 (edited) FC2 fighters would get raped by DCS fighters... I bought FC2 and I couldn't stand it. Until A-10 came out, I still flew Falcon 4 occasionally so that I could fly a fixed wing aircraf that was actually capable. No offense but, an aircraft modelled to survey sim level is never going to be able to compete with one that is modelled to the system fidelity that a real fighter is... at least, by ED's definition of a survey sim. I don't think that you'd have a problem for DCS fighters vs LOCKON fighters, it'd be like the Jetsons meeting the Flintstones. Edited March 31, 2011 by Speed Intelligent discourse can only begin with the honest admission of your own fallibility. Member of the Virtual Tactical Air Group: http://vtacticalairgroup.com/ Lua scripts and mods: MIssion Scripting Tools (Mist): http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=98616 Slmod version 7.0 for DCS: World: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=80979 Now includes remote server administration tools for kicking, banning, loading missions, etc.
RIPTIDE Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 I think its been said only recently there was going to be wpork done on patchs for FC2.0. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
RIPTIDE Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 FC2 fighters would get raped by DCS fighters... I bought FC2 and I couldn't stand it. Until A-10 came out, I still flew Falcon 4 occasionally so that I could fly a fixed wing aircraf that was actually capable. No offense but, an aircraft modelled to survey sim level is never going to be able to compete with one that is modelled to the system fidelity that a real fighter is... at least, by ED's definition of a survey sim. I don't think that you'd have a problem for DCS fighters vs LOCKON fighters, it'd be like the Jetsons meeting the Flintstones. I think you're wrong. The FC2.0 fighters would probably be far easier and have less workflow than a fully fledged DCS fighter. Hell, I know a guy that can get lots of Spamraam kills but can't trim (ie can't fly properly). lol. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
92nd-MajorBug Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 The FC2.0 fighters would probably be far easier and have less workflow than a fully fledged DCS fighter True, but "easy" isn't "efficient". That would be funny to see 4 vanilla FC2 F-15s vs 4 DCS F-18s, with full datalink support on one side and none on the other ;) 92nd Kodiak Air Force - May the Greuh be with you
rattler Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 HMM, how did the discussion get to FC2, I said I was not talking about FC2. Just DCS modules. I have a reply. They will be compatible but only through a patch. Hmm, seems strange it can't come with compatibility built in. I thought that was why ED was doing modules so one would be compatible with the first. According to the kind reply by the way, thank you for promptness, it will only be compatible after a patch is done. Oh well it gets there in the end I suppose. Cheers.:)
EtherealN Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 HMM, how did the discussion get to FC2, I said I was not talking about FC2. Just DCS modules. See thread title for the probable cause. ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules | | | Life of a Game Tester
rattler Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 See thread title for the probable cause. ;) hEE HEE,OOPS;)
Frostie Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 FC2 fighters would get raped by DCS fighters... I bought FC2 and I couldn't stand it. Until A-10 came out, I still flew Falcon 4 occasionally so that I could fly a fixed wing aircraf that was actually capable. No offense but, an aircraft modelled to survey sim level is never going to be able to compete with one that is modelled to the system fidelity that a real fighter is... at least, by ED's definition of a survey sim. I don't think that you'd have a problem for DCS fighters vs LOCKON fighters, it'd be like the Jetsons meeting the Flintstones. All it takes is a missile and a lock, thats all you need to take down a plane. The only other action with a similair impact to the event would be realistic ECM and ECCM which nobody is going to simulate anywhere near right in the coming years. I enjoy Falcon to a degree but can't stand the desktop feel it gives, real pilots don't trickle mouse pointers around their cockpits to make things happen? Many followers dupe themselves into believing it to be pilot nirvana, it ain't. It is abound with theory but lacks in practice. The opposite is true of FC2. FC2 simulates jet air combat a lot better than what many give it credit for. Lacking in full real avionic representation doesn't make it a poor combat simulator. "[51☭] FROSTIE" #55 'Red 5'. Lord Flashheart 51st PVO "Bisons" - 100 KIAP Regiment Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10 https://100kiap.org
EtherealN Posted April 1, 2011 Posted April 1, 2011 Agreed regarding combat simulation vs proceedure simulation. But also, don't underestimate the possible gains from a properly done study simulation in this department too - for example, in FC2 you do not have proper datalinks (and when someone implemented datalinks some people got pissed off, but meh), and depending on the armament options of a DCS fighter you might also get advantages of slammers with datalinks, or (for that matter) slammers that do more than a simple loft trajectory. These are things whose omission in FC2 does change the battlespace pretty radically. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules | | | Life of a Game Tester
Frostie Posted April 1, 2011 Posted April 1, 2011 (and when someone implemented datalinks some people got pissed off, but meh) I think your misinformed if you think it was the datalinking that pissed people off. ;) "[51☭] FROSTIE" #55 'Red 5'. Lord Flashheart 51st PVO "Bisons" - 100 KIAP Regiment Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10 https://100kiap.org
Recommended Posts