What do you think about P-51D and Flying Legends?

[MoGas]

That's why I think WW2 sims are more popular :)

 

Well, so far no DCS Fighter (I agree on a DCS module fighter, many just too lazy to learn, even the A-10C) is there, with the more advanced avionic, radar control, FM etc....

 

I would not call that, in CloD with the CEM and FM`s, it needs alot training to survive the merges, plus aiming skills...So far, CloD gives you a harder time then any other SIM, in case of dogfighting...And this is what many attract plus myself...

 

Soo, thats why it will be interresting to see the Lockon/DCS guys, flying with the DCS P-51 (with CEM, prober FM, DCS standard) in the first weeks, against the CloD guys (used to such FM/CEM for such plane), who will get the P-51 aswell (some for sure) on the dedicated servers, head to head! It will start already, with the rong joystick lol....

 

:joystick:

Edited March 14, 2012 by MoGas

[Speed]

That is certainly the case; BVR fighting is very different, and to some degree requires more SA and knowledge of systems as well as understanding what something that isn't your plane is doing.

 

That's why I think WW2 sims are more popular :)

 

World War II sims are more popular for a number of reasons:

 

1) Instant gratification- with no effort, you can be up in the skies, behind a bomber, and shooting it down!

 

2) Shallow learning curve- in every WWII sim, every plane is pretty much like every other one. There is nothing to learn really with a WWII sim- you just need to know where the gear, airbrakes, flaps, chocks, fire gun, fire cannon, and drop bomb buttons are, set your throttle and joystick axes/curves, and you're good to go. No real learning effort is required to just to play a WWII sim. To be good at a WWII sim though, you do need to understand how to dogfight, however. I'm not saying it takes no skill, far from it. It takes a lot of skill to be a good dogfighter. But, the point is, in a WWII sim you can go up there, with minimal training, and actually contribute something. Not so with a simulation of a modern aircraft.

 

3) Historical Feeling- even though the World War II has been hashed, and rehashed, and rehashed again on every imaginable media (books, movies, TV, video games, internet sites), people still have an odd fascination with it. You'd think after watching the 10,000th WWII documentary people would get tired of it, but they don't :huh:

 

Somehow, I get the feeling that a full WWII sim developed by ED will break out of the reasons I listed for 1) and 2) of why people like WWII sims. Somehow, I think DCS Flying Legends: P-51 will be a bit different, but we'll find out for sure pretty soon :)

 

And you know what would be awesome too? What if ED did something like a Balkans map. I'm not a huge fan of the Balkans theater, but a big benefit of such a map would be that we could use it for WWII AND for modern sims. And furthermore, it's not the same old Battle of Britain or Battle of Midway story we've been hearing about over and over and over and over and over and over again for the last seventy years, until, if we are forced to hear or read about it one more time, we puke our guts all over our computer monitors :puke:. Very few people know about the kinds of things that went on in the Balkans during WWII... all sorts of fascinating things happened, like this one, for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_battle_over_Ni%C5%A1

Edited March 14, 2012 by Speed

[Squid_DK]

There is a lot more to flying a WW II warbird then what you mentioned, you have to understand your engine and its weaknesses to be able to get everything from it, there is the use of oil coolers and radiators, you have turbochargers, some planes don't have constant speed propellors, you have to watch temperature constantly, you have drag from cowlflaps or oil and aircoolers. but that all depends on how realistic you want it, I prefer all out realism so you will be very busy watching your plane and getting the most of it.

 

I think several testors here have stated that flying the -51 is a handfull and I believe many are in for a very rude awakening.

 

I will also admit I have been through enough to not feel a need to start nagging on a product just because it isn't my first choice and I can see plenty of targets on the lists in DCS from truckmountes ZU-23's to UAZ jeeps over roadside checkpoints and infantry, I'm pretty sure a tanker truck will burn just nicely after a 3 second burst with 6 fifties.

 

Staffan

[sobek]

oil coolers and radiators, you have turbochargers

 

The mustang does it all for you. Oil and engine radiator cowl flaps are automatic, so is the blower gear and mixture. Even manifold is kept constant within certain limits. Not to say that she's not a handful, but within reasonable limits. :)

[Speed]

There is a lot more to flying a WW II warbird then what you mentioned

 

Which is exactly why I mentioned that I hope that DCS Flying Legends: P-51 breaks the mold set by every other WWII "sim" I have ever had the misfortune to waste my time in. Yes, I know it's not a WWII sim-yet- but one day it could be :)

[Insanatrix]

There's a lot more to a simulator than uber awesome modeling. The environment and the units and the feeling that it gives are a big contributor to the fun factor. If it just feels sterile and procedural than chances are it's going to get boring quick in an airframe that doesn't have a lot of systems to learn.

 

One of the things that made IL-2 for example so fun and so successful isn't so much that it's easy to pick up and learn but that the environment and the modeling of the environment were so detailed. The units and the landscape and the era of battle was what pulled you in. There were people who wanted more realistic flight models and more accurate modeling of munitions and effects. I can bet you though they wouldn't be willing to trade a sterile environment for that modeling.

 

Sometimes the feeling of flight is more important than the mathematics behind it. With the P-51 sharing the same environment as A-10C and there being no units of the time period of the P-51, it seems to me that it's going to be more sterile than it is right now with the current airframes.

[Squid_DK]

Many units here are fine for WW II emulation from the ZU-23 over the trucks and in part the T-55 but more so infantry, and structures I really don't mind that it isn't a FlaK 43, Panther or PanzerGrenadiere There is plenty of opportunities. and I want a plane that offers the challenges the real deal did that means more to me than just jumping in and fooling around, I want to go over procedures, I know that is not for everyone and thank the holy pizzadough for different tastes.

 

Staffan

[Insanatrix]

Think you missed the point of my post Danish. Obviously I enjoy procedure as much as you do otherwise I wouldn't be on these forums, I wouldn't have learned the entire start up procedure for the KA-50 and the A-10C and I would not have practiced proper weapon employment procedures and systems manipulation.

 

What I am trying to say is that if you look beyond the systems and the procedures to the environment, it is lacking somewhat.

[Squid_DK]

And you did miss mine, as stated, a lot of ground units are eligible for targets in DCS. and bland worlsd start a IL2 game straight from editor only your flight... you will only have that one thing in the world... do the same in DCS and you will have road traffic and trains.

 

Staffan

[Insanatrix]

True and I don't disagree with you on that point however very basic cars and trains do not make the environment. Using your own argument...

 

 

What types of units can I place in the editor of each respected title?

How does the overall detail of the environments compare? Do I have to emulate unit roles using other units?

If I do, how does that impact the overall feel of the sim?

Does it feel like the developers stuck a 1940's air frame in a sim designed for a much more modern battlefield depiction or does it feel like a fresh product?

 

 

I guess I'm talking more about aesthetics. I very well understand your point and that aesthetics mean less to you than Systems Modeling and Flight Modeling. To others it is the exact opposite. You say thank the holy pizza dough for different tastes, Yet you can't listen to someones viewpoint that is a direct contradiction of your own? Sorry I just find it very hypocritical and also very common of these boards.

 

Let it be what it is, someones view on the subject matter and move on.

 

"We often refuse to accept an idea merely because the tone of voice in which it has been expressed is unsympathetic to us."

[Squid_DK]

I did mention how a lot of stuff can easily emulate the WehrMacht stuff, and remember you have never been promised a 1940's simulation here, and I have never argumented against your viewpoints I offered my viewpont for my first post here and you immediately jumped on it.

[BIGNEWY]

I am looking forward to flying the P-51 :)

 

The thing I find difficult to understand is, if someone is new to DCS and the only aircraft they purchase is a P-51 will it seem strange to them not having 1940's targets ?

 

Remember think of this from the point of view of a customer who has no interest in A-10C or the KA-50 or any modern hardware ( crazy I know lol )

 

If it was me as a P-51 customer only I would be a little disappointed

[JimMack]

I am looking forward to flying the P-51 :)

 

The thing I find difficult to understand is, if someone is new to DCS and the only aircraft they purchase is a P-51 will it seem strange to them not having 1940's targets ?

 

Remember think of this from the point of view of a customer who has no interest in A-10C or the KA-50 or any modern hardware ( crazy I know lol )

 

If it was me as a P-51 customer only I would be a little disappointed

 

It depends on the missions that will come with P51D. I doubt that they will include Su-27s. As Danish said, there are many current assets that simulate the 1944/45 free range hunting that was carried out by P51s.

Who knows what other 2ndWW aircraft assets will become available from modders etc?

[swepain]

if ED moddels jesus, its jesus if anyone else says anything different, then that is blasphemy! and should be stoned to death. :music_whistling:

 

Agree that a ww2 bird would benefit from ww2 surroundings, that meaning both ground and air units, spec considering that P51 as far as far as i understand it was mostly guarding bombers on their runs! :huh:

[Squid_DK]

I am fairly sure that any product page for Flying Legends will mention that the surroundings are modern day Georgia, and that AI are modern (as in the last 40 years) of aviation.

if not I will agree that the P-51D can create issues, And as said by Jim wh knows what else will become available.

What I can see or imagine is that ED is kinda cornering the market on MS with their Flight, the concept could be along the same lines with some more goal oriented stuff from ED. Again that is what I can suspect I have no magic crystal ball.

 

Staffan

[159th_Viper]

I find it very interesting when arguments are presented as to the lack of a WWII environment, taking into account that the Mustang was only operationally involved in WWII for a year or so and even less in some theatres of WWII.

 

What about Korea?

 

3 years of war there and no mention of lack of a DCS Korean environment for the Mustang......

 

Why would that be?

 

I would be prodding for a Korean environment, especially so if I was to attempt to sway modders' talents in a specific direction. Then again, that's just me.

[Divide Et Impera]

I find it very interesting when arguments are presented as to the lack of a WWII environment, taking into account that the Mustang was only operationally involved in WWII for a year or so and even less in some theatres of WWII.

 

What about Korea?

 

3 years of war there and no mention of lack of a DCS Korean environment for the Mustang......

 

Why would that be?

 

I would be prodding for a Korean environment, especially so if I was to attempt to sway modders' talents in a specific direction. Then again, that's just me.

 

Agree. Plus, Korea would allow modern jets for future modules. it would be awesome.. with beautiful korean war paint schemes.

 

But no technical changes for the korean war with P51 ? or F51 ? since WW2

[BIGNEWY]

I find it very interesting when arguments are presented as to the lack of a WWII environment, taking into account that the Mustang was only operationally involved in WWII for a year or so and even less in some theatres of WWII.

 

What about Korea?

 

3 years of war there and no mention of lack of a DCS Korean environment for the Mustang......

 

Why would that be?

 

I would be prodding for a Korean environment, especially so if I was to attempt to sway modders' talents in a specific direction. Then again, that's just me.

 

 

 

Yes I would go for that :)

 

anything to take the P-51 away from a modern scenario :thumbup:

[159th_Viper]

But no technical changes for the korean war with P51 ? or F51 ? since WW2

 

As far as I recall, no, except for the designation of course as you stated (P to F). Changes manifested in the P-51G (prototype), P-51H (never used in combat and reverted to ANG) and P-51M (partial-production units scrapped).

 

P-51D was as good as it got when it came to ruining another's day :)

[Squid_DK]

Korea would be nice, especially with a flyable F4U ;)

plenty of opportunity there

[tintifaxl]

Korea sounds very good to me.

 

Would that be possible to do without ED's involvement (wouldn't want to drain resources from the DCS:Jet project ;)) as a community effort? I guess not, as the map tools are not released to the public.

[159th_Viper]

.....as the map tools are not released to the public.

 

http://en.wiki.eagle.ru/wiki/All_about_land

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=41814

[MoGas]

 

1) Instant gratification- with no effort, you can be up in the skies, behind a bomber, and shooting it down!

 

You can do it, with any other flytsim what is out aswell, its not only on WW2 sim`s....;)

 

2) Shallow learning curve- in every WWII sim, every plane is pretty much like every other one. There is nothing to learn really with a WWII sim- you just need to know where the gear, airbrakes, flaps, chocks, fire gun, fire cannon, and drop bomb buttons are, set your throttle and joystick axes/curves, and you're good to go. No real learning effort is required to just to play a WWII sim.

 

I dont know, from wich WW2 simulator you talking about, but you clearly not up do date! Again, I can start to fly every SIM and have my fun with it, without knowing all, and without skill....;) The later turns in frustation, and nonsense postings, on other forums...:)

[tintifaxl]

http://en.wiki.eagle.ru/wiki/All_about_land

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=41814

 

This is for the new (Nevada) engine?

[159th_Viper]

This is for the new (Nevada) engine?

 

No - current DCS engine. The tools are there for a lot of good things to be done. The will of the Community, well, that's another question :)