What about BMS?

[WildFire]

Surprised I havent seen them mentioned yet. As for all the third parties jumping on board I would think Benchmark Studios would have come up... They did quite a job reinvigorating the falcon field, and they know some radar stuff... Seems like a lot of people want an F-16 in here too.

 

You would think that might be helpful to ED, although I doubt at all they would need it. I'd still take an DCS F-16 over anyone.

[jp203000]

I hope so !

[sorcer3r]

From what I've read in bms forums I dont think this will happen (unfortunately!).

There seems still to be some avionic stuff in development for the next major release and also their F-18C will be upgraded etc.

So there is no time for modding in DCS. (And IMO they werent satisfied with working only on a SFM ;))

 

But their F16 is a good reference for all DCS jets coming. :thumbup:

[Teapot]

From what I've read in bms forums I dont think this will happen (unfortunately!).

There seems still to be some avionic stuff in development for the next major release and also their F-18C will be upgraded etc.

So there is no time for modding in DCS. (And IMO they werent satisfied with working only on a SFM ;))

 

But their F16 is a good reference for all DCS jets coming. :thumbup:

 

Yes I got that impression as well :cry:. I think it was my initial post on the BMS forums that drew a lot of ire.

A subsequent thread started by SUBS17 is having a much more receptive audience and generating some useful discussion.

It's a real pity from my opinion that the "DC" of Falcon becomes the lynchpin for continuing development in the BMS environment because I rarely use it, much prefering individually crafted T.E.s. It's just my opinion, so don't waste you breath flaming me!

Look, IMO the BMS devs have done (and are still producing) stellar work w.r.t. avionics, systems and flight modelling.

I'm no mathematician or aeronautics expert, but I *feel* that their advanced flight model for the F16 is still not as fluid as the *simple* flight modelling for FC2 and certainly can't hold a candle to the feel of flight in the dedicated DCS series. But then there's nothing factual in my opinion there, it's just the consequence of a gut extrapolation of my own flying experience as a grunt; read *baggage* in Hueys, Kiowa's, Nomad's and Pilatus Porter's (waves on the miniscule chance that there's ppl from 8/9 Bn Royal Australian Regiment circa 1980's here - I was Pyro from Recon Pl, Spt Coy btw).

But Falcon 4 still feels dated, although the Dynamic Campaign is much better than it's previous incarnations, I feel that the efforts would be better applied to DCS: World than to reviving a tired old war-horse. F4 was great until relatively recently, but it's now time to let it rest in peace .... *in my opinion*.

Edited June 10, 2012 by Teapot

[WRAITH]

Hi no offence Teapot,

 

But Falcon 4.0 concept a combat study sim will always be la crème de la crème in combat sims its history alone has more weight than any other sim read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_4.0

 

I went out and purchased it 14 years ago and still lives!

 

I also still have it...check here

 

http://i1171.photobucket.com/albums/r543/picturebucket7/IMAG0009.jpg

 

amongst some other sims....mmm...nice....

 

:smartass::joystick::smartass:

 

Its design roots is imbedded with real life Air Force input read these links:

 

http://www.combatsim.com/archive/htm/htm_arc1/bonanni1.htm

 

http://vko.va.ngb.army.mil/VirginiaGuard/leaders/bonannibio.html

 

It has a following of over 4000 members it would be wise for DCS to learn from the F4 concepts as we are talking about a "Combat Sim" and the old faithful F4 still has much to say in 2012 and future of combat sims.

 

http://www.simhq.com/_air14/air_507a.html

 

 

Peoples opinions of F4 is just that your opinions this is not a rant or swipe or attack on you or anyone or thing just saying and stating the facts my friend F4 is here for the long haul :thumbup:

Edited June 12, 2012 by WRAITH

[Kuky]

Well if you want to talk about study sim, then DCS Ka-50, A-10C and P-51D already surpass F4 in that regard. True that DCS doesn't have a DC but DC is not a study sim of an aircraft so F4 having a DC does not make it better than DCS because DCS models aircraft it has done better than F4 models F-16 and I've said this in BMS forums few days ago... if ED were to make an F-16 module it definitely be better than BMS... so call me a fanboy or what ever other names (which few individuals in BMS have done) but that's a fact.

 

I think F4/BMS fans cling on to DC and they won't let it go regardless if ED were to make a much better study sim of their beloved aircraft, and that's a shame

[WRAITH]

My point is on F4 concept alone its history and roots, developed with accurate real life input.

 

Please watch

 

It will always be the grandad of sims no matter what, fancy pixels and all ;)

Edited June 10, 2012 by WRAITH

[sorcer3r]

I'm no mathematician or aeronautics expert, but I *feel* that their advanced flight model for the F16 is still not as fluid as the *simple* flight modelling for FC2 and certainly can't hold a candle to the feel of flight in the dedicated DCS series...

 

Hm, IMO with coded FLCS, new physics enviroment (jet blast, turbulences etc.) their AFM is the best we can have for a fast mover. (for now ;))

 

I use the T.E. only for some training flights. Focus on DC is a good decision because for everything else we have the DCS mission editor. Cant wait for Grimes OnStation with a F16/18 :D

 

 

.. if ED were to make an F-16 module it definitely be better than BMS... so call me a fanboy or what ever other names (which few individuals in BMS have done) but that's a fact.

 

Until now there is no DCS F-16. So there are no facts for your presumption ;)

Edited June 10, 2012 by sorcer3r

[Jona33]

I'd leave it as it is. And they've stated they don't want to switch.

[Kuky]

Until now there is no DCS F-16. So there are no facts for your presumption ;)

 

I would so love ED releases F-16, just to prove my point :smartass:

[sorcer3r]

I would so love ED releases F-16, just to prove my point :smartass:

 

Me too, just not to prove anything ;)

 

But for DCS a F-18 would be better. Naval ops would make the "small" Caucasus theater a little larger.

[Tango]

DCS AFM needs a little tweak to make it equal BMS - currently you fly behind another jet in DCS and you don't get any wash/turbulence whatsoever.

 

Best regards,

Tango.

[PlainSight]

NOO, that would considered treason, they will never abandon F4. Keep the legend alive. I'm sure someone else could do the F16 for World, but BMS must keep F4 up and running. Competition is a good thing, keeps devs motivated.

[element1108]

DCS AFM needs a little tweak to make it equal BMS - currently you fly behind another jet in DCS and you don't get any wash/turbulence whatsoever.

 

Best regards,

Tango.

 

That's a lovely feature in BMS no doubt, but there is more to AFM than prop wash/turbulance, X-Plane 9 had that in long before BMS so doesn't really prove which is better.

 

I'm not faulting BMS and it's flight model, it's an amazing sim and the BMS team have done an unbelievable job with it.

 

BUT, when I fly the DCS aircrafts I feel like i'm FLYING.

[Justin Case]

Wow...I read the thread over at BMS and all of a sudden I lost respect for parts of that community, no one is taking Falcon 4 BMS away from us, he was just playing with the idea of moving over to DCS World.

 

I love the FM in BMS, it's not too far away from DCS...what bothers me though is the handling on the ground. The feeling of steering your A-10 towards the runway in DCS is really nice and makes a ramp start worth it!

[element1108]

Wow...I read the thread over at BMS and all of a sudden I lost respect for parts of that community, no one is taking Falcon 4 BMS away from us, he was just playing with the idea of moving over to DCS World.

 

I love the FM in BMS, it's not too far away from DCS...what bothers me though is the handling on the ground. The feeling of steering your A-10 towards the runway in DCS is really nice and makes a ramp start worth it!

 

They are just protecting their territory. Unfortunately for many in both communities there is no room for both. I think it's utterly ridiculous, but that's passion at it's finest I guess.

 

:doh:

[VTJS17_Fire]

Well if you want to talk about study sim, then DCS Ka-50, A-10C and P-51D already surpass F4 in that regard. True that DCS doesn't have a DC but DC is not a study sim of an aircraft so F4 having a DC does not make it better than DCS because DCS models aircraft it has done better than F4 models F-16 and I've said this in BMS forums few days ago... if ED were to make an F-16 module it definitely be better than BMS... so call me a fanboy or what ever other names (which few individuals in BMS have done) but that's a fact.

 

I think F4/BMS fans cling on to DC and they won't let it go regardless if ED were to make a much better study sim of their beloved aircraft, and that's a shame

 

+1

[WildFire]

Anyhow I just figured I'd ask. I thought maybe they'd be interested. Guess not...

 

Well I see where this went. Its kind of an unfair advantage cause if im not mistaken the DCS engine is much more recent than the falcon engine?

ED has a ridiculous team and to be able to sift through god knows how much data and create an AFM for BS or A-10 in only a few years says a lot. Im sure the boys at BMS are quite talented but honestly they didnt build falcon from scratch. It was built for them. They only had to improve upon a framework and for sure reprogrammed the whole thing.

 

Also BMS did some cool stuff with terrain, explosions lot of graphics updates, models and all that again improving upon an existing framework. DCS made FC1, FC2, DCS:BS, DCS:A-10C, and soon DCS:CA, DCS:FM, FC3 and some day Nevada.... Plus a holy bejesus amount of patching that I doubt I'll ever see matched by any company ever, all happening while they are pushing products. Plus all their ground models look damn good stock, the weather engine is tops, the night day scale is hot shit and the terrain changes per season all rock.

 

So yeah BMS has done some cool stuff. But holding a candle to ED just wouldnt fare. These folks do it all, and they dont half ass anything(You wont get a super bugged release of civilizations here). Obviously if DCS were to produce an AFM F-16 you could guarantee it would blow the socks off whatever falcon brings. Its not even fair, there are some pretty talented people at ED.

 

All in my opinion and the point of this is not to flame anyone its just to point out how even entering a debate about the comparison and contrast of these two is redundantly ridiculous.

[Wolfie]

As a flight simmer of old, I'll say it. DCS is gonna rule in the end. People will grudgingly see the light and come over. F4, Open Falcon, Red Viper, BMS have all had their day, and it was GREAT. But the F4 engine is ANCIENT! Its had its day. Eventually things like DC and turbulence, etc. will be incorporated into DCS World, and that will be that.

[SmokeyTheLung]

Its kind of an unfair advantage cause if im not mistaken the DCS engine is much more recent than the falcon engine?

 

Agreed.

It's neat that the BMS team has dusted off falcon to make it work with win 7, they've done great work.

 

A direct comparison between the two sims is really one sided though... DCS, you've got it kid, I don't know what it is but you've got it :idiot:

[sorcer3r]

Eventually things like DC and turbulence, etc. will be incorporated into DCS World, and that will be that.

 

Would be nice if we will get that. And a DC needs IMO also a larger theater. But all of this takes years.

And right now one of my most wanted features is stability. Thats one point why I prefere bms these days. You can run a campaign server for days without any crash.

[Cali]

That's a lovely feature in BMS no doubt, but there is more to AFM than prop wash/turbulance, X-Plane 9 had that in long before BMS so doesn't really prove which is better.

 

I'm not faulting BMS and it's flight model, it's an amazing sim and the BMS team have done an unbelievable job with it.

 

BUT, when I fly the DCS aircrafts I feel like i'm FLYING.

 

Are you saying that you don't feel like your flying in BMS?

[hassata]

P.S. I got the impression that VRS weren't too receptive either after sending them an email about recent DCS developments.

[cichlidfan]

P.S. I got the impression that VRS weren't too receptive either after sending them an email about recent DCS developments.

 

I guess things have not changed. This is from a very (3 1/2 years) old post from the VRS forum.

 

 

In terms of doing third-party for it. I doubt it. It would probably be too much of an investment for us to pull off for the potential gains. If DCS wanted to fund something like that with capitol investment, then maybe, but not solo.

[WildFire]

Are you saying that you don't feel like your flying in BMS?

 

Im gonna agree with the one that said he didnt feel like it was flying. When I flew any falcon title it did feel pretty arcad-y... Honestly The graphics here are so leaps and bounds ahead.... When you look out the F-16 window you see pixels and bright and dull palette colors and stuff...

 

When you look out the window in dcs you see a mix of colors (all different depending on season) and a high definition blinding sun, real clouds and no pixels anywhere. DCS is so close to feeling like your actual flying that looking back at falcon is very hard to do.