DCS WWII: Europe 1944

[NineLine]

give it give it give it!:joystick:

 

You already have it... its in DCS World now ;)

[sobek]

Its called maturation.

 

If you mean that age does by no means prevent of folly, i agree. :)

[Snoopy]

Doesn't anybody see the irony?

 

When the Mustang was introduced, everybody and their neighbour was screaming bloody murder how in the world ED could dare to let WWII planes fly alongside jets.

 

Now people complain that just that could be taken away from them (which seems to be not the case, btw.). If this forum isn't "La cage aux folles", i don't know what is.

 

:lol:

 

How quickly people forget!

[NineLine]

If you mean that age does by no means prevent of folly, i agree. :)

 

I have seen mature people turn to mush dependant on the right topic... so we are all prone to maturity system failures :)

[gavagai]

The one thing I can't wait for is the Bf-109. Also hoping we'll see different versions of it (G-6/U4 :wub:).

 

Ugh, I hate that low velocity weapon.

 

Since this is going to be a 1944 ETO sim, I would hope for a 109G-6/AS. That's an important aircraft for simulating the high altitude operations of the period.

[Merlin-27]

Of course not. But it's logical.

 

If WWII units (including external models) are in separate DCS: WWII, but not in DCS: World then they won't be visible in multiplayer unless all players have B-17 installed. If WWII units are in DCS: World then what's the point of having separate installs?

 

This is everything but logical.

 

If the B-17 is a module then it can be flown in either environment. I'm not sure where the confusion on that comes from. The "point" is that modules are independent of the era...or at least that is what has been proposed.

 

There seem to be many unknowns still with the implementation so you are only going to get so far dissecting the details.

[Python]

Doesn't anybody see the irony?

 

When the Mustang was introduced, everybody and their neighbour was screaming bloody murder how in the world ED could dare to let WWII planes fly alongside jets.

 

Now people complain that just that could be taken away from them

 

 

I think it's different, The complaints about the P51 were from the vocal naysayers who presumably didn't even give it a chance to see how good it actually is, I don't have the sales figures of course but I'm guessing a large amount of people purchased it regardless? whereas most customers posting here seem not to be fond of the idea of splitting world up.

[Cedaway]

That's exactly what I said above :)

 

What happens if we release, say, a G4M Betty for DCS WWII. You already bought the F6F but you have no interest in the Betty so you don't buy it. What happens when you go online with someone who owns the Betty? You gotta be able to do it, right? So you've gotta see that Betty, right, just not fly it? And the Betty owner, if he never bought that F6F, has to be able to see you dive on him out of the sun for just a split second before he explodes, right?

 

Now extrapolate that to modern jets. See where I'm going with this?

 

Maybe I'm dumb but no, I don't see/understand.:no_sad:

Online, everybody should see everyone else. Now, it's up to the server or mission designer to allow/forbid types of airplanes.

Anyway. I'm really looking forward your product. A year is long but we'll have other jets/helis during this time. Take your to bake the project to the closest perfection.

 

 

EDIT:

The 'Maturity' call reminds me that it was the same thing during the FC3 announcement...

I quote:

How about the release of an unexpected DCS module ?

DCS : MATURITY:lol:

(10/24/2012)

 

And cichlidfan rightly answered:

Sorry, still in very early development! :D

 

Let's say... 2 more weeks ;)

Edited September 2, 2013 by Cedaway

[Feuerfalke]

Doesn't anybody see the irony?

 

When the Mustang was introduced, everybody and their neighbour was screaming bloody murder how in the world ED could dare to let WWII planes fly alongside jets.

 

Now people complain that just that could be taken away from them (which seems to be not the case, btw.). If this forum isn't "La cage aux folles", i don't know what is.

 

:lol:

 

To be fair, these statements were not against a Mustang in DCS per se!

 

There were just a lot of people disappointed that instead of working on the next modern jet ED promised, they decided to model a single WW2-dogfighter completely out of the context, without opponents, maps and campaigns. A project, which postponed the next module, no matter what was said.

 

And the effort put into modelling th Dora as soon as possible shows how right these protests were. :music_whistling:

 

Now adding a WW2-environment to DCS, with new planes, new maps, new vehicles, even new effects and on the new engine is a whole different ball-game.

 

So, let's not pull facts out of the context to make our arguments.

[Double_D]

To be fair, these statements were not against a Mustang in DCS per se!

 

There were just a lot of people disappointed that instead of working on the next modern jet ED promised, they decided to model a single WW2-dogfighter completely out of the context, without opponents, maps and campaigns. A project, which postponed the next module, no matter what was said.

 

 

Not really, the P-51D Mustang was sitting on the shelf for years just waiting for the right moment to use..and they used it as a test module for the DCS-World..too see how it worked in that environment..

[NineLine]

Lets only focus on DCS WWII, any other sims, games ect shouldnt be discussed here.

Edited September 3, 2013 by sobek
removed OT quote

[Feuerfalke]

Not really, the P-51D Mustang was sitting on the shelf for years just waiting for the right moment to use..and they used it as a test module for the DCS-World..too see how it worked in that environment..

 

That is how ED looked at it.

 

I wrote from the customers point of view, to explain, why the reactions were the way they were.

[Double_D]

That is how ED looked at it.

 

I wrote from the customers point of view, to explain, why the reactions were the way they were.

 

Yep, understood that..point was from and I agree totally, but here in the forum..everyone jumps to conclusions quickly...and feel their needs comes before everyone/all else...needs

[Vampyre]

Pointless bickering indeed. Decision has been made, period.

 

Will there be night-fighters later on, like the Ju 88G or He 219?

 

and the Mosquito NF mk XIX, Bf-110G-4, P-61B Black Widow, and F4U-2 Corsair. Of course we will also need Lancasters, Wellingtons, Halafax, Stirlings, Hampdens, Ju-88A-4, He-111H-6, Me-410B, G4M Betty's as well as effective spotlights, ground radars/control and a way to provide an incentive for pilots to fly bombers to targets at night through Flak and enemy night fighters.

[Echo38]

So the engine-model itself is not simplified. It's streamlined for flying.

 

Wow! You should work in marketing.

[Feuerfalke]

Wow! You should work in marketing.

 

Actually I do.

 

But if you quote just this little sniplet out of the context, you should, too. ;)

Edited September 2, 2013 by Feuerfalke

[gavagai]

Wow! You should work in marketing.

 

:lol:

 

I can start up the DCS P-51 in 1-2 minutes, and warming up the engine probably takes another 2 minutes.

 

Look, if people don't want to do that, it's fine with me. Just don't try to tell me it's as accurate as DCS in simulating the aircraft.

 

----------

 

ninjaedit: Amazing! You do work in marketing!

[Feuerfalke]

:lol:

 

I can start up the DCS P-51 in 1-2 minutes, and warming up the engine probably takes another 2 minutes.

 

Look, if people don't want to do that, it's fine with me. Just don't try to tell me it's as accurate as DCS in simulating the aircraft.

 

----------

 

ninjaedit: Amazing! You do work in marketing!

 

 

Try that with -30 °C ;)

[NineLine]

Guys I want to see answers from Luthier, not swim through a sea pointless bickering... lets stay focused so its easier for him to find and answer questions when he finishes unpacking his toiletries :)

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

This is the greatest news I have had regarding flight simulation in the last few months since the uh-1h release was announced :-)

[Uufflakke]

Lets only focus on DCS WWII, any other sims, games ect shouldnt be discussed here.

 

And at the IL2:BOS site it is not allowed to discuss the DCS WWII sim at the moment.

 

Anyway, waiting in anticipation to see the first screenshots and vids of DCS WWII.

[-Rudel-]

That's exactly what I said above :)

 

What happens if we release, say, a G4M Betty for DCS WWII. You already bought the F6F but you have no interest in the Betty so you don't buy it. What happens when you go online with someone who owns the Betty? You gotta be able to do it, right? So you've gotta see that Betty, right, just not fly it? And the Betty owner, if he never bought that F6F, has to be able to see you dive on him out of the sun for just a split second before he explodes, right?

 

Now extrapolate that to modern jets. See where I'm going with this?

 

But the solution is already in DCS World. We don't need to have all modules to see each other. And the game only loads the assets it needs for the mission at play. :joystick:

 

 

To extend on what Zaelu is saying Luthier, the external shapes and textures are included to ensure the objects can be seen across different module installation types. What's not included is cockpit data and objects.

 

....Someone should throw a poll up and leave it open as more and more WW2 sim fans sign up here.

[hegykc]

@Luthier:

 

What were some of the other title choices for this sim? You mentioned a possibility for a very awkward name, what was it?

[NineLine]

And at the IL2:BOS site it is not allowed to discuss the DCS WWII sim at the moment.

 

Anyway, waiting in anticipation to see the first screenshots and vids of DCS WWII.

 

 

We have a "other Sim" section for news on other sims, you can talk about BoS there, but its not needed here.

[TimeKilla]

lol :thumbup:

 

What a day.

 

Will I be able fly the spitfire as a British faction?