Ver 1.2.3 News

[159th_Viper]

I totally agree, i'd love to see DCS:WW2, DCS:Vietnam, DCS:WWI, DCS:Falklands etc....but one at a time, not a bit of this here, a bit of that there....a mess!

 

But then it has always been stated time and time and time and time again, ever since I started from back in 2005, that LockOn and now DCS is not limited to a specific timeframe.

 

With that in mind, and keeping in mind the intention to bring us a Digital Combat Simulator as opposed to a Modern Digital Combat Simulator, the P-51 makes perfect sense, even more so with the Butcher-Bird and map-making tools on the horizon.

[Cowboy10uk]

You're obviously a 'glass-half-full' person, I'm not so positive (wish I were...), seems to me very worrying that ED struggles to muster more than 20 people regularly for proper stress-tests of their new builds; signs that perhaps the company is spread too thinly on too many projects and is now unable to deliver the products over 50% of their customers really crave (stable CA multiplayer + DCS fighter)....of course it didn't help that they wasted a year of dev time on an antique fighter with no place in the DCS universe (still baffles me)....

 

Anyways, I hope my pessimism is ill-founded as I love DCS World and wish ED nothing but success, but am increasingly worried.....

 

:) Well, I think I'm only a glass half full person when there's a beer in it. ;)

 

To be honest i think it's true, that what Ed is trying to achieve with Dcs World is Ambitious and I don't believe anyone has managed to pull it off yet.

 

However I do strongly believe that Ed is in the best position of any company to manage it. Yes at the moment everything seems all over the place, but dosnt everything at the beginning.

 

Yes it may take a while and along the way, there ARE going to be failures and disappointment. But in the long term, we are going to get a fully integrated simulation battlefield.

 

I'm just sitting back and enjoying the ride, also I can't do anything to change the release dates or outcome, so no point in getting wound up over it. :)

 

Cowboy10uk

[Mandrake5]

With that in mind, and keeping in mind the intention to bring us a Digital Combat Simulator as opposed to a Modern Digital Combat Simulator, the P-51 makes perfect sense, even more so with the Butcher-Bird and map-making tools on the horizon.

 

For the future yes, when supporting WW2 products are ready or almost ready to ship with it. At the time of publication P51 was/still is a lonely orphan and makes absolutely no sense at all, given that everything else in DCS World is modern era (Georgia map, KA:50, A10, FC3, + the logically sensible DCS: Fighter).

 

It's a question of prioritising resources, not deciding what may or may not be a good idea for the DCS series 'one day'.

[159th_Viper]

.....and makes absolutely no sense at all.....

 

To you, maybe. To the powers-that-be and others, it makes perfect sense, me included. It's a big elephant, to be consumed one bite at a time. Cannot expect to shove it all in in a onener.

[Mandrake5]

To you, maybe. To the powers-that-be and others, it makes perfect sense, me included. It's a big elephant, to be consumed one bite at a time. Cannot expect to shove it all in in a onener.

 

 

Fair play, each to his own, but are you saying what you really think?

[159th_Viper]

Fair play, each to his own, but are you saying what you really think?

 

Yes, I can see the bigger picture. As said, this has been years in the making and I can finally see the end of the line. We're nearly there.

[Feuerfalke]

Yes, I can see the bigger picture. As said, this has been years in the making and I can finally see the end of the line. We're nearly there.

 

I wouldn't call it an end of a line. I rather think of it as a new level, a new world of possibilities. Think of where DCS was 5 years ago and what was achieved in just those 5 years. How many modules are being worked on now. How many improvements have we seen in this short period of time. How many more we're going to see in the next 5 years?

 

I've never seen such a bright future for my flightsim-hobby.

[shagrat]

You're obviously a 'glass-half-full' person, I'm not so positive (wish I were...), seems to me very worrying that ED struggles to muster more than 20 people regularly for proper stress-tests of their new builds; signs that perhaps the company is spread too thinly on too many projects and is now unable to deliver the products over 50% of their customers really crave (stable CA multiplayer + DCS fighter)....of course it didn't help that they wasted a year of dev time on an antique fighter with no place in the DCS universe (still baffles me)....

 

Anyways, I hope my pessimism is ill-founded as I love DCS World and wish ED nothing but success, but am increasingly worried.....

They did never "waste" a year of development there. As far as I've read the P-51D was done by different guys that never worked on the precious "Fast Mover"... also it was said they did it in their spare time and when it was nearing the finishing line it got official. May be just rumours, but even if not, there is one point that fits into the picture. You know TFC (The Fighter Collection) owns one of the Worlds largest collection of flight capable WWII Birds. And you know they are investing money, right?

Well let's put it like this: If a big, big, big Ferrari fan is financing a Racing Sim producer and nicely asks if they "maybe" could think about making a nice Ferrari model, would you expect him to be denied, because the guys on the forum always ask for a Porsche?

 

I guess we are lucky that they support ED and do not demand(!) WWII only simulation... and keep in mind how simple it would be to get all the data by just flying the real things :D

 

Also it was stated again and again and again that DCS is a flight sim not specific to simulating a specific time period. Actually it is a FLIGHT sim, so even a DCS: Soaring plane with accurate thermals would be fun (ED - don't take that too serious).

 

In the end it doesn't matter what planes ED builds, as long as they continue building them and support 3rd parties building theres, we will have plenty to choose from and everybody may find a bird to his liking.

Then it is up to the Mission builders to make good use of them...:thumbup:

Edited February 24, 2013 by shagrat

[MegOhm_SD]

For the future yes, when supporting WW2 products are ready or almost ready to ship with it. At the time of publication P51 was/still is a lonely orphan and makes absolutely no sense at all, given that everything else in DCS World is modern era (Georgia map, KA:50, A10, FC3, + the logically sensible DCS: Fighter).

 

It's a question of prioritising resources, not deciding what may or may not be a good idea for the DCS series 'one day'.

 

One would have to ask if you own the P51?

 

Whether it is out of place or not is in the eyes of the beholder.

Personally, I have done alot of damage with Bombs, Rockets and Gunzz to ground units with the Mustang.

And I have shot down many KA50s and SU25Ts. (also had my arse handed to me). I have had alot of great dogfights against the frogfoot. That said, it is a pleasure to just fly the P51 and occasionally crack open the canopy a little while landing just to hear the wind. Running in, making a strafeing run, lighting up the target, pulling up and looking back at the smoke and secondary confirmation explosion is priceless...Makes all the sense in the world to me.

 

As for the next patch... I can wait...what is hard to wait for is the F18 and hopefully some Carrier OPs to go with it.

Edited February 25, 2013 by MegOhm_SD

[104th_Cobra]

^^

I had shot down one A-10C, flying a P-51 online at the 104th's server. For the fun of not having in that moment (months ago) FC3.

I tried to dogfight an AI P-51, in singleplayer with the mission editor, and I got owned while flying a MiG-29A. I didn't fight for separation, of course, but stayed in the melee.

[luza]

Perhaps this week will be the one! :) We can hope

[leafer]

Highlights, mostly nothing new

• Mid range DCS ACFT closer to FC level detail (around 0.26.00)
  
• F-86(:thumbup:) & Mig-15 in development (don't remember these two being mentioned before) (around 0.34.00)
  
• New Maps, ED & 3rd party (0.34.50)
  
• Maps (EDGE), Nevada (delayed a "bit"). When done should allow new maps being developed "quicker" (0.41.08 )
  
• After release of 1.2.3, finalize FC3, UH-1 will be released, work "diligently" on new modules (1.02.00)
  
• Dedicated Server in works, hand-in-hand development with EDGE....on hold currently (1.05.25)
  
• Eventually see a dynamic campaign. Not a question of "if" but "when" (1.10.00)
  
• F/A-18C & F-15C internal ED developed (not 3rd party) :thumbup: (1.11.40)
  
• "Probably" APG-73 radar (F/A-18C)
  
• "Probably" APG-63 Version 1 (F-15C)
  

 

Thanks, paulrkiii!

 

Before people start to panic at "DCS ACFT at FC level", remember, the Frog in FC has AFM, so there's hope. F/A-18C, Mig-15 and F-86!!!! New maps!!!! leafer needs a man hug now... :D

 

For the future yes, when supporting WW2 products are ready or almost ready to ship with it. At the time of publication P51 was/still is a lonely orphan and makes absolutely no sense at all, given that everything else in DCS World is modern era (Georgia map, KA:50, A10, FC3, + the logically sensible DCS: Fighter).

 

It's a question of prioritising resources, not deciding what may or may not be a good idea for the DCS series 'one day'.

 

I'm pretty sure hidden from the public, for obvious reason, is a pretty darn good road map by ED. The P-51 could be ED testing the water.

Edited February 25, 2013 by leafer

[Witchking]

I hope the Su27SM will be also internally developed. :p

[jmod]

Before people start to panic at "DCS ACFT at FC level", remember, the Frog in FC has AFM, so there's hope. F/A-18C, Mig-15 and F-86!!!! New maps!!!!

leafer needs a man hug now... :D

 

I'm going to get panic! :(

The reason I've chosen ED over VRS is the DCS: A-10C level of ACFTs, the level that military simulations rely on!

 

There is no DCS: A-10C level of ACFT anymore? :(

[Dejjvid]

If ED didn't aim for A-10C fidelity they would have released 5+ aircrafts since A-10C.

 

How many have they released until today? ;)

[NBEagle]

Highlights, mostly nothing new

• Eventually see a dynamic campaign. Not a question of "if" but "when" (1.10.00)
  

 

 

Should this be a dream don't wake me up!

[zaelu]

Should this be a dream don't wake me up!

 

It's Monday though... you need to go to work don't you? So... :D

[leafer]

I'm going to get panic! :(

The reason I've chosen ED over VRS is the DCS: A-10C level of ACFTs, the level that military simulations rely on!

 

There is no DCS: A-10C level of ACFT anymore? :(

 

i did not say that. What we know is the F/A-18C and F-15C are getting the DCS A-10C level of realism. After those two then you can panic. :D

[NRG-Vampire]

I'm going to get panic! :(

The reason I've chosen ED over VRS is the DCS: A-10C level of ACFTs, the level that military simulations rely on!

 

There is no DCS: A-10C level of ACFT anymore? :(

 

dont panic. as Wags-Matt stated in the radio interview...

http://truthfrequencyradio.com/beyond-w-tony-kudos-17182/

...F-15C, F-18C and Su-27SM will be study level simulation - means same (or more) level of realism as Warthog to me

and i am pretty sure the FW-190x will be same also - the counterpart-adversary of the Mustang

 

AFAIR Wags mentioned few year ago the DCS:Warthog sim is about 90% same as "real" Warthog USAF sim, so lets hope Eagle, Hornet and Flanker will get the same high % of simulation (i am worrying a bit about radar capabilities)

[112th_Rossi]

I'm not too worried if radar implementation is not 100% real, so long as it suspends disbelief

[Darkwolf]

with the recent message about the UH1....

 

....I'm now suspecting ED to hold on patch 1.2.3 until UH-1 BETA is ready. :P Which i would completely be ok with. :)

[luza]

Please be the day! Want my JTACS working online! :))

[Dejjvid]

Other features and fixes planned for 1.2.4 have to be ready as well.

If they are testing the 1.2.3 installer as Wags stated it would be a huge waste of resources not releasing it asap. But both ED and the customers have really high expectations on the net code, so no one wants to see a failure now when it's been "delayed" (reworked) for 2 months.

 

So I don't think we see 1.2.4 just yet.

[Rotorhead]

dont panic. as Wags-Matt stated in the radio interview...

http://truthfrequencyradio.com/beyond-w-tony-kudos-17182/

...F-15C, F-18C and Su-27SM will be study level simulation - means same (or more) level of realism as Warthog to me

and i am pretty sure the FW-190x will be same also - the counterpart-adversary of the Mustang

 

AFAIR Wags mentioned few year ago the DCS:Warthog sim is about 90% same as "real" Warthog USAF sim, so lets hope Eagle, Hornet and Flanker will get the same high % of simulation (i am worrying a bit about radar capabilities)

 

I hope this will be the case. Study level planes are the reason why I'm into DCS. I'm considering buying FC3 to support ED (and I'm also a little curious about the upcoming Flanker pit), but honestly, after my first flight in DCS Ka-50, going to FC3 would be a step backward for me.

 

I really can't wait for flying full-blown DCS Flanker, as well as the Hornet. Ooh and the Hind that Matt mentioned in the podcast! :love:

[Flim]

I hope they don't back off on the realism for the select aircraft... f-18/f-15/su27...

 

That would be a bad move for ED to take the easy road, but I think they will do it right!