This is an entertaining assessment of the DCS A-10 experience...

[Count Sessine]

It was an inconsidered review by Tim Stone. One of the joys of getting into a study sim like this one is consulting with the community and the learning process itself, quite simply. You get a feeling of achievement by mastering a complex procedure or system.

[Laud]

Because the player can always rearm, thus you can't design your missions around it.

 

It would be one single (and maybe simple) restriction that needs to be implemented, so that mission builders can decide which loadouts are available for the pilots in-game (even better being able to set that for every client aircraft individually, depending on their task). But still that would be more simple than introducing a complex funds/inventory-system, don't you think?

 

There is still so much more important stuff to do, which needs to be focused on.

[Rusty_M]

It's a fair review, and just goes to show that this sort of thing isn't for everyone.

[Bushmanni]

Learning happens through effortfull study. This doesn't mean that you have to make the learning hard but the student needs to pay attention and challenge himself. Considering this there's no really easy way to learn to operate a complex combat aircraft in a combat environment. But the learning would be faster and more rewarding if the necessary information would be less fragmented and easier to find and comprehend than it is now. For example the real life A-10A flight manual is way more complete, understandable and easy to search. But it's more burden for anyone to read the real life manual, the game manual and developer forums to find all the necessary info to operate the aircraft effectively compared to having all of it in the game manual. One big element of a study sim is it's manual. Quality sim has a quality manual.

 

The best tutorial and reference material I have ever come across is the 3D Studio MAX tutorials and reference. While even it isn't complete it does a very good job of bringing the user up to speed from zero point with everything important and laying solid foundation to learn more. Some important aspects of it's goodness is the separation of tutorials and reference done in a student friendly way. Reference doesn't simply tell what some feature is but also explains everything that relates to using the feature effectively and gives some basic instruction on how to use it in a typical situation. Tutorials aren't simply a set of instructions but also try to produce some understanding of the procedure so that the student knows how to adapt the procedure to his own situation and needs. Good tutorials and reference have lots of overlap.

 

And tactics, techniques and procedures for combat is one thing the manual seriously lacks.

[Itkovian]

I dunno, this review feels like reading an RPG review that complains about combat being all about dice rolls and numbers.

 

This is a study sim, emphasis on STUDY. It attempts to simulate an EXTREMELY complex aircraft and its avionics, and that means it will re-create all the complexities and frustrations found in the real thing. If you're expecting to no longer have to resort to notes after a few weeks, you do not understand the genre. It takes YEARS for real pilots to "wear" the airplane, and so it should be the same in the simulation.

 

And as was previous posted, you can't expect them to include a complete and effortless training. It's not humanly possible. You learn these sims through a combination of RTFM, in-game training, online searches, and lots and lots of personal effort and practice (which includes picking your own goals and challenges).

 

Personally I think the training in this sim was excellent. It served as a good primer, and gave us the fundamentals needed to learn the rest. The Flight Manual, in turn, gives us full instruction on how the systems operate, and also a lot of procedural information, and the rest you need to learn from experience OR from others who have learned from experience.

 

After all, something tells me that the USAF Flight School doesn't just plop pilots in front of a computer screen or flight manuals, and then tell them to figure it out. They have flight instructors with lots of experience teaching them. And while we can't have those, we do have the forums where experienced players can share their insight.

 

Anyway, rant over. :)

 

Itkovian

[Laud]

Such reviews happen, when people want to blow up stuff, before they know what the CDU is and what it does... You don't learn how to drive a car by taking part in a formula 1 championship race.

[Zomba]

Really interesting thread.

 

As far as accessability is concerned for newcomers I suppose I would be a good example. I had zero understanding of flying, let alone flight sims at all. A very brief spell in BS, but I didn't really know what I was doing and was on my own mainly.

 

Again no background in flight, no real prior interest, no real prior interest in the military either. I got involved with an Arma group when Arma 2 was released that sort of forced me to understand simple ground tactics, but that is about it. It was more of a social thing.

 

I'm about as far removed as someone could be who could pick this sim up and run with it. At first I struggled, I just didn't understand the logic of why things were the way they were in the aircraft. It all seemed completely alien and unintuitive. I was fortunate enough to have a discussion with someone that understood the systems, but more importantly understood the logic behind the design. The importance of integration and how to use it. That was all I needed, it was a 'I see why they designed it like this' moment. After that it all made sense.

 

I joined a squadron that is more like a very informal IP environment. A number of the members have military/airline backgrounds and understand a fair bit about how things are typically done. We all concentrate on a particular aspect that interests us and once it is understood we teach the others in the group how it works. Like syncing the collective knowledge base. The end result is everyone is more or less at a very similar level. If someone is away for a bit and on coming back there is a gap in their knowledge anyone of us will jump on the server with them to bring them up to speed.

 

I have yet to read the manual, yet understand quite a bit about fighting the aircraft to the point that everything tends to be muscle memory now. I very rarely think about what I am doing with the controls or systems, but am normally thinking about the target, tactics and terrain. I'm not bragging about my skills, but just illustrating how a good learning environment can take a completely ignorant newcomer like me and in a relatively short time turn them into a reasonably proficient A-10c simmer. I went from thinking this thing is just far too complex to thinking what a well thought out design and no wonder it scares the shit out of the enemy.

 

My recommendation to newcomers that find it all too daunting at first is to find an online squadron. Most are very helpful and patient if you ask for a bit of help. I always take the time to help new pilots as I see it as an investment. It spreads the good word about EDs work.

 

Some people prefer to plow through manuals, I prefer to watch someone who knows what they are doing and copy them. When just buzzing around on the server it is like flying with a bunch of IPs that will walk you through something at anytime if you get stuck on something. Problems only remain a problem for a minute.

[Bulletstop]

I have to say it sounds like he is lazy and does not want to commit to really learning the sim. I understand to some this maybe a daunting sim and it can be, but like anything else you learn ,if you take a section at a time to learn it then suddenly you know almost all the system and are flying and fighting with out actually thinking about it.

I really do understand how hard it can be. I have add and I have to learn complicated items by taking the small steps or I get over whelmed. It has never stopped me from learning,

On the technical side, I can understand how frustrating it can be, but I am leaning more toward user not installing it correctly. Just my opinion tho.

 

 

 

 

Bullet

[Zomba]

I stick with the repetition thing. Just learn a small task or step and repeat doing it until it sticks. Then move on to the next step.

Edited April 15, 2011 by Zomba
Ninja edit:Spelling

[Scarecrow]

ED should take this kind of review in their stride, there will always be a new crop of blossoming sim enthusiasts reaching maturity every year. The casual gamer will give up after a week and claim "It's a game, it's meant to be fun" due to the classic misconceptions that learning isn't fun and an achievement is only worth having if its logged on your steam profile.

As for the training, the only area were I think ED could have done more is on the CDU but as others have said the community provides so it's not really neccessary for ED to spend money creating training materials for the finer points of the sim.

Saying that the "Wow it took 15mins to start" thread shows how many forum members seam to delight in treating beginners with such disdain as to make this community, which should be smarter and more mature than the average group, a hard one to learn from.

 

P.S "Master Seargent Extreme Seargent Master Shooter Person" almost made me cry:megalol:

Edited April 15, 2011 by Scarecrow

[Headspace]

Saying that the "Wow it took 15mins to start" thread shows how many forum members seam to delight in treating beginners with such disdain as to make this community, which should be smarter and more mature than the average group, a hard one to learn from.

That was my point from before. Not everyone stays clueless. People will learn if they aren't driven away by Sgt. Milsim McHardcore before having a chance to learn.

 

We have a few people playing A-10 with us on Friday who, prior to getting the game, had never played a flight sim before. And they are really good at it now.