DCS 2.5 Update Thread

dcs

#1543

Maybe I’m really tired but I read that while I was driving and had to pull over with the giggles.

Been up nearly 38 hours but I maintain that was avery very funny mental image


#1544

On a more serious note. I’ve never flown any aircraft featured in dcs in r/l. I’ve flown a couple of x planes and fsx offerings. But the dcs aircraft FEEL right. X plane is pretty close imo. But when you blast off the runway in an empty barely fueled f15 and look back over your shoulder at the tarmac vanishing… By god it feels like I imagine it would in the real thing.

Regardless of my amateur attempts at shooting targets or following mission way points. the feeling of flying is the reason I use sims. And dcs is so close to perfect for me for that reason


#1545

Amen brother, amen.


#1546

Being known as the Negative Nancy here and being German myself I can only say that you seem to be right there. :smiley:

But that aside:
What bothers me (and basically drove me out of the sim twice) is that the planes are basically perfect but the “simulation environment” is lacking in some ways. That and the (now improved, but pretty lacking for years) communication of ED with the community are the main reasons for me to criticize DCSW.

I like the sim and have been around since the LockOn days, and when I re-joined the community after a few years of absence in 2011 I did so to make an effort to finally help and improve the AI. I created a few forum threads to help start discussions and - based on my programming experience - help the devs by finding ways to make the whole thing a lot better with a minimum of work.

The whole AI thing bothered me a lot because I wanted to make great missions, and I basically stopped making missions back then because the AI (especially the ATC) was so severely flawed that it contrasted uncomfortably with the great planes in the sim.

That whole effort went nowhere unfortunately.
Without Moose and other fan made scripts (and to be honest: even with those) you spend half of your time satisfying the editor instead of scripting your mission. It is tedious.

Also:
I am a gameplay guy. I admire nice graphics like everyone else but that’s not what gets me to play a game. We got one graphical improvement after the other, new planes and all that jazz happened, and that’s great, but the AI and the environment basically stayed the same or even got worse.

Now, things are getting better lately.
Examples:

We eventually got collideable trees, and you can even hide behind them.

We finally have the SA-2 and flak for higher altitudes in the sim (previously you could just circle at 15,000ft in your A-10, bombing the living hell out of your enemies with GBUs, OR get insta-killed by modern SAMs. Nothing in between.)
I made a thread about it in 2012 or so (getting good resonance in the community) and nothing happened until 6 years later. But now it finally did.

So yeah stuff is happening.
But last time I checked we still had AI that can magically look through clouds, spot you visually on huge distances regardless of your camo paint job or whether you are coming from the direction of the sun, shoots you through smoke and so on, spots infantry miles out but fails to properly taxi the plane on the ground.
WW2 tanks spot incoming planes from any direction in split seconds and shoot with precision comparable to modern aiming systems, but fail to cross bridges.

Some stuff is of course nitpicking for some people and MOST IMPORTANT for others.
Examples:
Radar partly doesn’t work like radar does. Helicopters for example are hard to lock for some reason. In real life helicopters have huge bright easy to lock radar signatures because of their whirly parts.

Everyone who has seen real FLIR pictures knows that the FLIR in DCSW is… not really realistic. They are working on it (they said. But then they said that about the ATC as well).

IFF is… rudimentary at best.

There are others. Some could be considered “bugs”, some “missing features”, some “nice to haves” or “cosmetic stuff”. YMMV

But the worst thing was (and partly still is): if you mention that kind of stuff, some people will show up and accuse you of hating DCSW and… EDIT: other stuff sometimes.

Combined with forum rules that are both ambiguous and enforced arbitrarily that’s why I rarely post on the official forums these days.
It just isn’t worth spending the time if you cannot achieve something and stay polite doing so.

Edit:
Gah, needed to edit the post, it became a tad too personal.


#1547

You are absolutely right about the need for iteration on AI, the mission building environment and ATC.

Is it useful to keep harping on that? Not if it’s done more than once without constructive steps to make it better.

I myself am a glass is half full kind of guy. There’s a couple good deep swigs of flying goodness in flying a careful approach in a MiG after blasting three vipers to kingdom come.

Things are moving. Slowly, but moving. This glass is only gonna get fuller (and that’s where the beerstein analogy starts falling apart lol)


#1548

Same here for the most part. That’s why I stopped posting about the topic over there.


#1549

If you pour beer slowly into my glass, it’s never going to get full! :wink:

DCS is an amazing sim, it’s just a pity that some people get so wound up at the small stuff, that they can’t see the big picture and appreciate just how good it is.

I’m really looking forward to the Dynamic Campaign, which I hope will give a good experience for both the single player and multiplayer crowd. Add the F16 to the stable and I can see the die hard Falcon crowd will quietly start moving over to DCS because despite the amazing things they have done with BMS, it is still an old sim, and there is only so much you can do with code that is over 20 years old.


#1550

Ripping DCS apart? pretty sure there is enough there to do that but there is a lot of good as well - The best thing in DCS by a mile for me has been the campaigns for sale - with a few good free ones (M2000).

Valid concerns include the amount of modules still listed as Early Access - even the MiG-21bis and the FC3 Su-33.

But not really a surprise as I remember writing about 8 years back it would be in this exact state trying to do hard core modules on this scale.

I bought the Hawk so I could moan about that it is crap and doubt I would ever bother with it if it could still be used after the next patch - but I am aware that a lot of people do want to fly the Hawk regardless and do want some kind of value for the money they paid out.

That highlights that flight sims are a personal thing with everyone wanting different things. DCS doesn’t really match what I want so it is very much a third sim for me personally.


#1551

Might need to split this thread to clean it up.

The feeling of flight, physics model, whatever you want to call it, in DCS is great. Probably the main reason I keep coming back.

I would argue the sterility of missions and lack of exciting experiences is really a more accurate representation of combat than you would think. I would wager the mundane operations are more exciting in real life, and the combat is less exciting. The dramatic sequences shown in the latest trailer are probably about as far from a real representation of combat as a Battlefield game is from ground combat.

Bottom line is DCS is the best simulation of combat aircraft I have ever played. Graphics, systems, feeling of flight, nothing compares.


#1552

You know that’s strange,I beat my best time doing the “Vega$ Tour” mission and thought I was able to push The Merlin a bit farther without breaking it.


#1553

DCSW is certainly not the only piñata that has the rivet counters swinging sticks!

My brief foray into TACPACK and [email protected] development was certainly not a bed of roses. I was working a SE Asia / Vietnam “Pack” with several others, on line. The project repeatedly went off the rails as a few vociferous individuals insisted that we didn’t have the correct focus.

They wanted to make FSX into some kind of ARMA / Op Flashpoint set in Vietnam. They wanted us working on small jungle bases and hidden VC sites, that you couldn’t see from the air…both back in the day and now, in the sim. :roll_eyes:

I built a Haiphong (the city, harbor and two NVAF air bases) and a Cam Rahn Bay (port facilities with AI shipping, naval and merships). Had to redo whole sections of coast line, correct a few thousand sqkm of ground textures as well as create a number of original scenery objects (including an animated ZU-23-2). But that really didn’t please a small, vocal group of individuals. The work was appreciated by the actual developers but, in the end…I let the turkeys get me down and took a sabbatical…haven’t been back. :slightly_frowning_face:

Well…I seem to have gone over the Mudspike single post cliche limit…sorry about that. :blush:


#1554

I bought the Hawk because I genuinely wanted to fly the Hawk. As a module, we all know that it never fulfilled it’s potential, which was unfortunate. I still feel that I had my money’s worth though. It costs the best part of $50 to go see a movie with my wife by the time you factor in drinks and popcorn.


#1555

Hey on a completely different note; any of you guys notice the Su-34 is in the game now? Anybody still in “stable” to confirm it is added with 2.5.4?
In the encyclopedia, the scud launcher is added as well, but doesn’t load the model. The hellduck works deliciously, I just shot 8 of 'em down with my dual-racked uberhornet. What gorgeous targets!


#1556

The most “on topic” statement we can agree on is that this time, with the 2.5.4 we have more core changes than specific aircraft fixes and features and it’s been a nice breath of fresh air. I’m really happy for those, and will happily wait 2.5.5 with the same eagerness I have for the tomcat or any other cool bird.


#1557

DCS World Winter 2018 Sale is Here!

At long last, get great savings on the entire library of DCS World products! Lasting until January 7th, 2019, save 50% on most DCS World modules! This applies to aircraft, maps, and campaigns.


The only exceptions include:

Note: the sale only applies to released products.

Get these deals in the DCS e-shop

DCS World Eagle Dynamics Module Drawing

Want an Eagle Dynamics DCS module for free? Here is your chance! Just Share the following post on your Facebook page and you will be automatically entered in the drawing on January 7th, 2019. We will randomly select 10 winners to receive any currently available Eagle Dynamics module.

DCS 2018 and Beyond on Facebook

DCS: P-51D Mustang and World War II Update

We are pleased to update our first Warbird for DCS World, the Mustang! This week’s update includes both a complete overhaul of the cockpit to include deferred shading and physical based rendering technology, as well as a more detailed 3D model and textures.

In addition to a huge update to the cockpit, we have also greatly improved the external model and added the option to fly the P-51D-25-NA version. This was the most common P-51D for the European Theater of Operations (ETO) with its primary difference being its radio and IFF systems. This is most visible by the dorsal antenna.

As notes in prervious newsletters, both the Bf 109 K-4 and Fw 190 D-9 have also gotten outstanding improvements to their cockpits and external models to bring it to DCS World 2.5 standards.

With the huge updates to the P-51D, Fw 190 D-9, and Bf 109 K04, and all the time and resources invested, the price of each warbird will return to $49.99; however, all three aircraft will take part in our Winter 2018 sale. These are free updates to existing owners.

These are free updates to existing owners.

Coming next year, we have new AI air units like the P-47D, Ju-88, Fw 190 A-8, A-20G, C-47, Bf 109 G, Mosquito, C-47 and others taking to the skies of DCS World War II. Of these, we are already at work making the P-47D, Fw 190 A-8 and Mosquito flyable. In parallel, the new damage model system is now being applied to all our warbirds.

We also have a new and exciting World War II map in development.

DCS: P-51D Mustang - Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney Campaign

Developed by Reflected Simulations, this campaign is the perfect setting to fly the newly updated Mustang!

unnamed%20(3)
(https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/campaigns/)

Purchase from DCS e-shop

Become a member of the most famous fighter unit of the USAAF, take part in escorting large bomber formations, support the ground troops after D-day, or engage the Luftwaffe over the snowy hills of the Ardennes. The Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney is a semi-historical campaign for the P-51D Mustang. It follows the 352nd Fighter Group from May 1944 through the Normandy landings until Operation Bodenplatte in January 1945. This campaign has a plethora of details and Easter eggs to make you feel like a young American flyboy in the Army Air Forces in 1944.

Key Features:

  • 14 semi-historical missions focusing on the 352nd Fighter Group
  • A detailed background story, mission contexts, checklists and encounter reports
  • Detailed briefings and briefing images, including separate PDF mission files
  • Unique kneeboard graphics and checklists for each mission
  • Hundreds of specially recorded voice-over messages and radio broadcasts
  • Historically accurate custom skins
  • A wide array of missions including fighter sweep, bomber escort, armed reconnaissance and ground attack

DCS: C-101 by AvioDev Update

This week, AvioDev is proud to make available the Enhanced Flight Model (EFM) for their C-101EB version and launch the more-weaponized C-101CC version.

(https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/c-101_aviojet)

Purchase from DCS e-shop

DCS: C-101 Aviojet module includes both the C-101EB and C-101CC models. The C-101EB model is the primary jet trainer and aerobatic display aircraft of the Spanish Air Force, whilst the C-101CC model, with its 7 hard-points and uprated engine, is a versatile light attack aircraft that has seen combat with the Honduras Air Force against drug traffickers. It is also in service with the Jordanian and Chilean air forces. The two models of the C-101 have many similarities that include cockpit layout, core-systems operation, and aerodynamic design. This commonality brings something for everyone to include lead-in jet training, advanced aerobatics, and light attack.

Features of DCS: C-101 include:

  • Complete electrical system modeling
  • Complete circuit breaker simulation with correct failed systems behaviors
  • TARSYN gyro system replicated with exacting detail
  • Accurate flight director system
  • Custom air data simulation (airspeed/altimeter behaviors, etc.)
  • Custom navigation system simulation
  • Complete fuel system modeling
  • Complete hydraulic system modeling
  • Flight controls/landing gear can sustain damage if poorly handled
  • Accurate pressurization system
  • Accurate oxygen system
  • Icing model
  • Fully adjustable cockpit and exterior lighting

A quick trailer on C-101EB/CC w EFM

DCS World 2.5.4 Open Beta

This week we updated the Open Beta from 2.5.3 to 2.5.4. Highlights of this Open Beta update include:

  • Updated P-51D Mustang to include the P-51D-25-NA version
  • Improved cockpits and external models for the Bf-109 K-4, Fw 190 D-9, P-51D Mustang, and Spitfire
  • Corrected blue fog
  • Increased AGM-65 range based on altitude
  • Fixed Su-33 late activation crash
  • Corrected ATC request for takeoff error
  • F/A-18C Hornet: added GBU-12/16/10 laser-guided bombs, A/A Waypoint (bullseye) and BRAA, AGM-65F SHIP mode, and corrected cockpit errors and ACM HUD symbology
  • Numerous improvements to the RAZBAM AV-8B NA and M-2000C, as well as the Heatblur AJS-37 Viggen

Please find the complete change log here

Happy Holidays,
The Eagle Dynamics Team


#1558

I wonder if AvioDev would be interested in acquiring the Hawk and wrapping it up. Yes, I know the 101 has taken forever…but maybe what they’ve learned to this point will hasten it along. I mean, the 101 has second to none modeling and texturing…seemed they were only struggling with the AFM. Now that they have the AFM, maybe they could take that knowledge forward and tweak up the Hawk.


#1559

I’d buy it again if they did!


#1560

Yes. However, afterwards you cannot go home and…um…enjoy a nice Merlot with the Hawk…just saying.


#1561

Ahh… I would guess no. I don’t want to knock an effort but given what I have heard the VEAO developers say … it would likely be easier for someone to simply start over. Patching for DCS changes by ED (who know their codebase well), that’s possible. Fixing the Hawk? Probably not.

This is based on the comment by a VEAO dev who stated that it was impossible to implement multi-crew in the Hawk because they had attempted to take a ‘dffferent route’ with their implementation that was fundamentally incompatible with the way ED was recommending 3rd party developers attempt it. Add in their inability to handle changes to the DCS engine in anywhere near a quick turn-around time tells me, as a developer, that their design is not adaptable to change and requires a major effort to maintain. I would stay as far away from their code as I possible could - for my own sanity :slight_smile:

I could be wrong. Would love to take a quick look at the code and be proven wrong.


#1562

Question: why are we talking about Hawks when there are Mirage F1s on the table? One even has two seats!