I would say around 1960 because there are some awesome planes that flew during Vietnam before 1970.

But otherwise Uhhh exactly this especially the WW2 modules it's not like there aren't enough WW2 sims out there.
Or at least a better mission editor, the current one is so limited you can see it in the missions and servers that are played most (104 Airquake & VA Virtual Aerobatic).

I'm with Jedi on this.
Study level planes all fine and dandy - I did enjoy learning the A-10C but in all honesty, I never fly it nowadays.

I think more money and more pilots would show up if they crafted some FC3 plane packs.

Imagine early/mid/late cold war era packs such as:

Sukhoi Strikers: Su7/Su17/Su25
Sukhoi Fighters: Su9/Su15/Su27
SAAB Pack: Draken/Viggen/Gripen
Euro Pack: F104/F5/F16A
USAF Pack: F4E/F16/F22
Navy Pack: F4S/F14/FA18
Navy Strike: A4E/A7E/A6E

or role packs:
MiG Pack: MiG21/MiG23/MiG25
Russian AF: MiG29/Su27/MiG31


or since many of them lived through some major upgrades even family sets would be possible:

Fishbed pack
MiG21PF, MiG21MF, MiG21bis

Phantom packs
USAF F4C, F4E, F4G
Navy F4B, F4N, F4S
RAF F4K, F4M, F4J
Euro F4F(LW), F4E(HAF), F4E(TAF)

Draken pack
J35B, J35F, F35J

With such packs the multiplayer hooligans could join any "era server" flying their Fishbed of simulated era - no problem joining.

Today you need to survive in your 21bis in a Eagle spamraam environment (ok, server host could limit to Sparrows - but does it happen besides 51st?)

$30 each pack if fc3+ modelled, fair price?
$50 for opponent bundle, say one F4-pack with a 21-pack.

All with minimum 1 campaign included.

There we have it, everybody wants something different. With the pace of the current development and style of no real focus on any one era, nobody is going to be satisfied. Give me a FC Vietnam package and I wouldn't be wasting my time on these forums.

Actually, I think it can be said that almost everyone wishes they would stop their doomed attempt at competing with IL-2. Regardless of anyone's feeling about study level vs. FC, doing that would definitely speed the process up.

I enjoy the WW2 aircraft very much. Had a blast flying P-51s during the recent Case Blue PvP campaign.

Give me the Normandy map, WW2 objects and an AI bomber or two for Germany/Allies and I'll be a very happy simmer. And I'm not really interested in FC3-level aircraft, no thanks.



The only thing I'm missing is a WYSIWYG 3d editor for placing objects on the map, that would be great. Other than that what is missing? I always thought the DCS editor was pretty good.

I've said the same countless times, and I'd be very happy. I don't mind the study sim offerings but I hope another 3rd party team will jump aboard and make FC3 level aircraft. PFM, nice cockpit, partially clickable (or not, doesn't matter much to me). Sell them for a lower price, value varying depending on the model. The variety of modern planes would open up considerably as well. Take the Mirage 2000 for example. We would likely be able to see a -5F, or even -9. That is simply not possible with the level of detail RAZBAM is striving for. The result is an early C model, which is fairly limited. There is nothing wrong with that, but I would like to see more modern variants. Those that prefer study sim levels can buy a C, those that are okay with simplified avionics can get a -5F.

And maybe ED can release an FC3 level F/A-18C at a reduced price. Not worth it for the trainers as they're kind of simple as is, but it would be excellent for the Hornet.

As mentioned this sounds like an excellent opportunity for a 3rd party dev. There are a number of study sim developers already, ranging from semi modern F-14s to WWII. I think it would be viable if a 3rd party team released an FC3 level Su-35, F-16C, Super Hornet, Rafale or something. I think there is enough of a player base to support such a studio.

Man alive, what a great two pages.

Everything Jedi said, +1
Everything Oden said, +1
Everything Johnny Red said, +1

I saw that mafia campaign thing for the P-51 and it just makes me laugh and cry. All that effort to make some uber-awesome simulation of that iconic aircraft, and that's the best we can do with it?

ED could fill a monster hole that exists, straddling the border area between Strike Fighters 2 and DCS A-10 (for example). Other than Falcon 4, which is some weird hybrid of the two, there is no game that provides the graphics and multiplayer gameplay that DCS could provide if they'd stop this nonsense.

FC3 with clickable cockpits. Do that, start cranking out some era-appropriate jets faster, and we can be done here.

On top of that there are some outstanding issues with the game. I am still being blown out of the sky by BMPs easily. While flying an Su-33. I noticed they can instantly track and detect me once I get within a certain radius. Even if I come from behind their turrets will turn around and be tracking me perfectly every single time. In the real world a ground vehicle like that does not have that ability. It is as if it has a radar with 360 degrees of instant detection/refreshing. Even if the commander spotted the aircraft as he happened he scanning the horizon it will take some time to track the aircraft. I am not too sure how accurate the laser range finder / other equipment is for tracking a high speed fighter either.

The BMPs and other APCs are still better anti aircraft guns than the dedicated AA units. And it has been like this for well over a year now. I almost never play ground attack aircraft now because of it. Unless we can get a Eurofighter, F-16 or any high speed fighter that can carry 6+ anti tank missiles I won't be doing A2G until this is fixed. And that largely includes buying low speed attack aircraft which rely on rockets/guns/bombs. Considering a large portion of the planes are ground attack or light trainers I think this is a pretty big issue.

The core assumption you guys are making is that cutting down on non critical systems, presumably like oxygen and whatnot, will cut down development time enough to properly flesh out DCS.

Now I don't think any of us have any proof one way or the other, but given the fact that FC 3 still doesn't have AFMs for 2 of its 6 aircraft after 3 years says, to me at least, that your assumption may not be correct. Aviodev and VEAO's flight model troubles contend it further.

Personally, my biggest gripe with DCS is the Caucasus map. Trees with no collision and poor terrain poly count genuinely reduce the value of helicopter modules and CA. ED said they'd update it, but no details as to what that update will actually do. Never mind when it will be here.

I think the update is the texture pack, which is listed for $14.99. I suppose it can certainly enhance the terrian but it will always look a bit dated. It is very old.Most of the map is from 2003's LOMAC, although with updated textures from Flaming Cliffs.

My feelings on that point can almost be described as rage.

Actually that is not correct. The terrain mesh resolution was updated significantly for BS 1 (and naturally all subsequent releases incorporated that). That isn't to say that it's not showing its age.

Yeah. IRL A-10s try to stay around 20k altitude because it's safer than risking MANPADs and SPAAGs when they have a perfectly viable standoff capability since '05 anyway. In DCS they stay up there because of BMPs. Nice one ED, Rassija stronk!

The "FC3 vs full level" discussion never grows old, does it? Or the "old planes vs new ones" for that matter. Even though some arguments don't make much sense whatsoever. Well, DCS WWII will NOT and can NOT be competition to CloD & BoS BECAUSE of full systems modelling. These are two completely different categories. There are no "other" WWII sims on the market with planes of DCS complexity levels. Not counting FSX/P3D with flying only for the sake of flying (FSX tacpack is a gallant attempt, but it will always lag behind dedicated combat platforms). So people who want this one step of fidelity higher add DCS to their sim collection and are here to stay, as there are just NO alternatives. Exactly the same applies to old jets built by BST and LNS.

That's how I got here with my consumer's money, buying every aircraft pre-dating mid-'70s. Wouldn't touch the DCSW with a stick if there were no old planes, or if planes were FC3-level only, 'cause I already have modded Il-2 series for these, and I know I'm not the only one. Spreading consumer base can only be a good thing, as long as there are 3rd parties with sufficient manpower & skills hired for the additional job. Now, whether VEAO and AvioDev are actually up for the task and whether ED coordinates the whole endeavour correctly is... another matter, to put it mildly.

Telling 3rd parties to stop making old birds will not miraculously redirect them to these modern ones some of You are so anal about, as 3rd parties only make planes they're interested in, no matter how obscure they are (e.g. C-101, Viggen). Now, that might somehow work with ED itself, but even ED has contracted finishing Normandy map to external company, so it's not like WWII project takes THAT much of their own resources.

That's the problem isn't it?

There are no alternative to anything. Want a modern jet sim? Historical jet sim? WWII sim? Ground units? Apparently the answer to every single question is DCS World. Yet we have 3rd parties who all treat DCS World as their side job (whether that's because they all DO have another job or because they make FSX/P3D planes as their main one), and a main developer who has a development schedule that frankly looks more complicated than Boeing's.

I don't know how many people work at ED, but if it's less than 250 I can understand why it's taken us this many years to get this far when they're working on:
EDGE
Integrating 3rd party campaigns
Integrating 3rd party maps
Integrating 3rd party planes
Hornet
Hormuz
A list of unreleased WWII planes so long I don't even remember what's on it
A long list of already released planes (WWII and otherwise) that still need fixes and/or updates to bring them up to the standard of the latest releases
A long list of non-airplane specific fixes (like AAMs) that still need to be completed

There definitely is a lot of balls in the air and people seem unwilling to give ED the latitude to wait on one thing while they do another.
"Where's Hormuz?"
"Where's the Hornet?"
"Where's Normandy?"
"Where's the Spitfire?"
"Where's the fix for XYZ?"


A narrowing of focus would've been a great help...several years ago. There's no putting the cork back in this bottle now.

Despite the fact that there ARE other WWII sims out there (complaints about insufficient complexity notwithstanding), there are NO other fast jet sims out there, period. BMS doesn't count--it's not from the 21st century. There are no other helo sims, period. FSX/P3D doesn't count, you can't engage in combat.
So, SURPRISE SURPRISE! the fast jet and helo people are impatient with the WWII stuff diluting efforts even by a fraction. It STAGGERS the imagination, doesn't it?

What good is broadening the customer base by simply increasing the number of dissatisfied customers? Instead of Y customers having their products mostly complete, we have 2Y customers with their products mostly needing updates or not even existing yet.



The Jedi Master

I'm not too up to date on IL-2. In what ways are DCS WWII planes more realistic than CLoD?

There are things you'd never even think of trying to do in CloD that you can do in DCS. Things I've flown sims for two decades without doing and don't intend to start doing now and therefore don't care about.
After all, CloD included numerous flyable planes, a terrain, AI planes, ships, ground targets, and a ton of other stuff for the price of one DCS WWII bird that includes none of that. Naturally it's modeled to a higher standard. The question isn't "is it or isn't it", the question is "with this pace of releasing them and no suitable environment for them (targets, terrain, comms, etc) is it necessary?"

With music, an artist can release a song or two off an upcoming album before the rest of the songs are finished, and that works fine. With a sim, you can't really enjoy part of it if the rest is still years away.



The Jedi Master

What makes BMS "not count" exactly? Just because it's "not from the 21st century"?


What's stopping them from saying "hang on, we realize we've bitten off more than we can chew. We're stopping development on X to concentrate on finishing Y." Heck, if I were them, I'd stop EVERYTHING and concentrate on getting the CORE game finished that way it's not changing all the time and 3rd party guys have to adjust for each change.


How about EECH? What makes that "not count"?

I think that bit of honesty would go a lot farther than the current schedule.

In my experience flying both 109's I think that Oleg really nailed the 109 in Clod...the E-3, I really enjoy it with the damage model and the guns with their tweaking ballistics ...awesome!