DCS Fragmentation

[JG14_Smil]

If F-15 vs. P-51 ever happens, I want no part of it.

 

Agree with first poster.

 

I want what I bought into, not some remake of ARMA, across multiple time spans, yet.

[Exorcet]

It's only the most extreme case. And it would still be what you bought into (I assume you mean realistic combat). There are no time spans. P-51's were serving into the 70's at least. At that point, they could have run into a number of units in the sim, probably as a recon or light attack plane in a low budget air force.

[311Gryphon]

If F-15 vs. P-51 ever happens, I want no part of it.

 

Agree with first poster.

 

I want what I bought into, not some remake of ARMA, across multiple time spans, yet.

 

It's already not a remake of ARMA...those aircraft aren't too realistic at all.

 

I'd actually like a remake of ARMA but with realism and less bugs. The integration of ground, air, and sea forces would be pretty cool.

 

Multiple time spans isn't a problem; however. That's all controlled by the editor of the mission. Having more available aircraft isn't a bad thing. I have not seen a single P-51 in any of my A-10 missions. Having said that, I don't play a lot of multiplayer so perhaps people are worried about folks jumping into a P-51 in a "modern" combat server. I can see that as an issue but can't that be controlled in the server? If not, let them and shoot them down.

[Echo38]

How do you feel about not really having anything to shoot at? Not really an issue I take it?

 

I love mock dogfights more than anything, and duelling other P-51s still offers much for me to learn from. However, I must say that same-fighter matchups are a bit static, compared to different-fighter matchups, and that is why I am very pleased to see the FW 190D approaching. Having two different fighters brings another element of pilot skill to the table--that of understanding the strengths & weaknesses of your aircraft and the enemy aircraft, and matching your ship's strength against the enemy ship's weaknesses (and keeping him from doing the same to you).

[Hamblue]

Plausible is pretty flexible.

 

I already showed that P-51's were still on the front lines while the F-15 was in development and testing. If there was enough reason to bother, F-15 vs P-51 could have easily happened.

 

The P-51 is honestly as useable in DCSW right now as the Ka-50 and A-10. People just don't care for it because it won't be in the role it's famous for.

Weren't on the US Front lines. F-15 development started in the mid to late 60's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang

 

F-51s flew in the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard throughout the 1950s. The last American USAF Mustang was F-51D-30-NA AF Serial No. 44-74936, which was finally withdrawn from service with the West Virginia Air National Guard in late 1956 and retired to what was then called the Air Force Central Museum, although it was briefly reactivated to fly at the 50th anniversary of the Air Force Aerial Firepower Demonstration at the Air Proving Ground, Eglin AFB, Florida, on 6 May 1957.[42] This aircraft, painted as P-51D-15-NA Serial No. 44-15174, is on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force, Wright-Patterson AFB, in Dayton, Ohio.[43]

[Exorcet]

The US hardly matters, they were just one user.

 

From the Wiki link

 

The Dominican Republic (FAD) was the largest Latin American air force to employ the P-51D, with six aircraft acquired in 1948, 44 ex-Swedish F-51Ds purchased in 1948 and a further Mustang obtained from an unknown source.[53] It was the last nation to have any Mustangs in service, with some remaining in use as late as 1984. Nine of the final 10 aircraft were sold back to American collectors in 1988.[49]

[Echo38]

Interesting first post.

 

As I said, some of us aren't exactly happy that you're suggesting that our favorite aircraft shouldn't be featured. Don't be surprised if some who usually don't post feel that this is important enough to warrant giving voice. We virtual piston pilots may not outnumber you virtual jet jocks, but we are not insignificant.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Echo38

[Exorcet]

As I said, some of us aren't exactly happy that you're suggesting that our favorite aircraft shouldn't be featured. Don't be surprised if some who usually don't post feel that this is important enough to warrant giving voice. We virtual piston pilots may not outnumber you virtual jet jocks, but we are not insignificant.

Certainly, the P-51 is a favorite module of mine and I have no shortage of things to shoot with it.

 

I just need to get rudder pedals so I can hit the things I'm trying to shoot.

[blksolo]

Well if DCS wants to throw in any fighter from any era and still say its a realistic scenario why not throw in DCS Tie Fighter.That would be awesome:music_whistling:

[Echo38]

why not throw in DCS Tie Fighter

 

I'll bet Yo-Yo would have a blast with the flight physics for that.

[GGTharos]

You can throw it in yourself. You might even convince someone to run a DCS: Star Wars server.

 

Well if DCS wants to throw in any fighter from any era and still say its a realistic scenario why not throw in DCS Tie Fighter.That would be awesome:music_whistling:

[blksolo]

I was being sarcastic of course,but if they did it..........I would sell my soul to have it lol

[Grimes]

Tie Defender or Tie Interceptor would be better.

[winz]

What about DCS: AT-AT ? :)

[sobek]

You can throw it in yourself. You might even convince someone to run a DCS: Star Wars server.

 

Please, you'd have GL financially beating the living daylight out of you. Sorry, i mean Disney. :doh::)

[S3NTRY11]

ED saying to Bezcl "We don't want the Mig-21, it doesn't fit in our current era" would not transform into Bezcl automaticaly developing a 4th gen aircraft. Not to mention the community backslash from such restriction.. People looking forward for that plane (and there are a lot) would be pissed with such decision.

 

Whoa there, champ. I'm not advocating putting the pin back in the grenade. I'm saying think a bit harder before you pull the pin in the first place. Besides, I think that the Mig21 fits quite nicely into the era bracket I'm mostly referring to. And I'm looking forward to it, so I'd be pissed too ;)

 

One thing all thriving 3rd parties platforms (FSX, ArmA, Oblivion, SimCity 4) have in common is little to none dev interference.

 

I think you're more referring to mods, which are 1) typically free, and 2) not generally endorsed (with a few exceptions - one major exception being the proxy cash-cow that is DayZ).

 

-edit - whoops, missed FSX - yes there are many third party add-ons... but are any endorsed by MS?

Edited July 11, 2013 by S3NTRY11
missed FSX mention.

[S3NTRY11]

As if to be a lightning bolt from Zeus himself:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=109847

[311Gryphon]

 

 

I think you're more referring to mods, which are 1) typically free, and 2) not generally endorsed (with a few exceptions - one major exception being the proxy cash-cow that is DayZ).

 

-edit - whoops, missed FSX - yes there are many third party add-ons... but are any endorsed by MS?

 

Except that the results are the same. If you look at a game with a very large, very supportive community, those communities are usually very involved with ongoing development. Here with DCS it's a bit different, but in many cases you get end users CREATING content for the game which allows them to be more invested. The games usually last longer in terms of people playing them which then turns into more developer support for those games. That is regardless of the fact that they are mods or that they are free.

 

Like I said, DCS is a different animal but there are more endorsed mods out there than you may think, although they all are a bit different from each other. For one thing, many games try to incorporate the "free" mods that were created for earlier iterations. The Elder Scrolls franchise is an example of that. They take free 3rd party content from a previous game and make their own for the next game. Some "mods" turn into games, like Counter Strike did. Some people make little games like "Narbacular Drop" that wind up becoming main stream games like "Portal". Then there are other resources with some games that allow the end user to create items for the game with the hope that the company will pick those items up and the end user will receive royalties for those items. And finally, there are some very professional 3rd party developers that still put out free mods. This happened a lot with Operation Flashpoint where you had options of very realistic aircraft, realistic landmines, realistic artillery, etc that was created by groups for their own purposes but released to the community for free.

 

All of this is to say that anything that gives longevity to DCS is a good thing. Anything that gives options and versatility to DCS is a good thing. I don't see any fragmentation at all. Either that or it was fragmented from the start. But at any rate, the more 3rd parties that make aircraft (any aircraft) the better in the long run for us and for DCS.

[jazjar]

LOL I thought that this thread was about DCS: M67 Fragmentation Grenade.

[TaliG]

LOL I thought that this thread was about DCS: M67 Fragmentation Grenade.

 

You are correct...

Someone pulled its pin though and we became ''2 pieces'':doh::lol: