I mean… they’re doing it already. You mean to ask… more or less?
1 Like
I thought in the Northern Latitudes that if you said “no coffee” aloud a Tim Hortons franchise would pop out of the ground instantly like a bean stalk.
4 Likes
For me it is NO. I mean I am ok with WWII period specific aircrafts. That NO goes directly to the other content like maps and stuff. I can have fun in Mustang over Caucasus, NTTR, Persian Gulf or wherever.
I dont need to pretend that I am Gabreski over Europe in '44. I am ok to pretend that I am rich man, living in Vegas / Sochi, who bought WWII plane and fly dogfights over desert / black sea 
4 Likes
ED cannot be all things to all players. Its WW2 models are wonderful. But for 5 years they’ve been expensive sandbox pieces. There is another sim that already has this genre mastered. I don’t look to that sim to give me modern jets and I don’t look to DCS to give me props. I mean I won’t discount that there is a potential future. I own it. I will continue to play it as opportunities arise. But up to this point the experience has fallen well short of that other sim.
9 Likes
I answered no. DCS has always been modern combat and that’s kinda what they do best. Nothing against WWII stuff but I feel focusing on this broad of an area is a recipe for disaster. Sooner or later something is going to be left out.
4 Likes
I went with a no, because of the reasons well explained above.
I love DCS WW2 aircraft but I’d rather see DCS focus their efforts somewhere in the 1950-1990 range: pick a theatre and time and really flesh it out properly. I don’t mind too much whether it’s Korea, Vietnam, Iran-Iraq war, Falklands or the first gulf war…but they just need to focus efforts on a particular era and get it right, make it immersive. And I fear the more thinly they are spreading their efforts the less likely this is going to happen…so WW2 is a no from me.
4 Likes
For me, I’d say yes, but only because of the fidelity of the modules. I think it is fair to say for the overall WW2 air combat experience, IL2 BoX is hard to beat…but DCS modules are IMHO simply in a class of their own. I love the Spitfire. It is without a doubt the most detailed virtual Spit I have ever seen, and in VR it is unmatched. I cant wait to get my hands on the Mosquito. The P47 will no doubt find it’s way into my DCS hangar too…
I would like to see some more early jets and Korean War era piston aircraft too. A Sea Fury and Firefly would mean a lot to me personally. I would also really love to see a DCS Swordfish for the same reason. There are so many amazing aircraft that would be amazing as DCS modules, and the older they are, the simpler they would be systems and avionics wise, which should mean they would be easier to produce.
4 Likes
Just doesn’t sound like good business to me. ED has the “jet” simulator market - only one.
Jason has a very good prop plane sim. TFS’s mod for CLoD (Med extension) is coming.
Why try the competition? Just afraid it will eat into their revenue and affect what I want them to do 
1 Like
We talk about all these types and it has me longing for 1946. Even BoX falls well short by comparison. The modern sim experience is a visual miracle but a gameplay shell game. I don’t want any more planes, helicopters or unicycles unless there is a fully fleshed game in which to operate them. The BoX Career is pretty good. But lately I keep coming home to a 109 airfield attack and my wingys refuse to turn off their nav lights and fight. They just circle the base at pattern speed until I run out of ammo, at which point they die. Snooze. Maybe that builds a case for ED. I don’t know. Right now I am too sick to care. 
3 Likes
I wonder if I can vorpX that… 
3 Likes
'Fraid not, DCS AI will do the same thing. They won’t even land; they’ll fly around endlessly in a loop, waiting for the wind to perfectly align with the runway before even considering it, usually resulting in them running out of gas and crashing.
1 Like
Ah, that’s why. For the Spitfire when trying to improve my take-off and landings I use the ‘Instant Mission’ thing for the Spitfire/Normandy that comes with the module. The mission looks nice, but there’s an AI Spitfire that flies overhead at mission start that I always follow as something to do. It can never land, it just lowers gear and stays at stall speed, just sort of meandering around above the airfield in S turns. I always feel a bit sorry for it, like it’s afraid of the land or something.
As an aside, the Cold Start mission for the Spitfire/Normandy is also a bit annoying, in that the fog is so heavy that you shouldn’t really be allowed to take off - making a landing after your cold start a pretty frustrating exercise as the field is not in sight when over 100 feet… 
2 Likes
I believe this is done to enhance performance in the mission, as otherwise it might potentially slog down on a lot of systems.
1 Like
Does the fog speed things up then? I wasn’t sure if it actually wasn’t more demanding or not 
It’s good that they are trying to make it run faster as an intro mission, but I’m sitting in a Spitfire that is beautifully and exhaustively modeled, wobbling my fuel pump to the tiniest detail, so taking off in thick fogs that would ground a CAT II just seems to break the spirit of (cough) ‘realism’ that I’m sat there for. Ah, well, a small thing though.
The fog cuts off stuff that doesn’t render out past X distance so it has the effect of limiting your view distance and thus improving performance (less polies rendered). If you compare your framerate on the deck in the Normandy Spitfire dogfight mission to the cold start/takeoff missions, you’ll likely see a significant jump in the foggy ones.
1 Like
I voted “no”. Seems that’s covered with IL2-x stuff? Though honestly not much time spent there on my part.
Here’s to more F-4’s, F-8’s, A-4’s, A-6’s, Mig-17’s – and the ‘Thud!!!’…and a proper map to go with them. You get the ‘stick-and-rudder’ stuff, but with jets. And carriers. Sorry for the divergence…
2 Likes
I vote no; IL2 series has WW2 covered, and more consistently and with better execution. DCS should stick to the jets.
1 Like
Few people will care, but here’s my take on it.
I flew Il-2 1946, BoX and DCS WWII planes. I’ve got hundreds of hours in pretty much any of them.
I understand why some people think “why would X airplane need to be in DCS when Il-2 has it already?”
I know the majority of people won’t feel like me, but the reason why I pay these outrageous prices for DCS is to go on a journey of learning with each new plane. I read on each plane like there’s no tomorrow. There’s nothing I like more than reading something in a flight manual and seeing it simulated like gun ports freezing, indications acting up when I forget my pitot heater in cold conditions, or needing to dilute fuel into my oil system during winter, or my aircraft starting to feel unbalanced if I forget to switch between fuel tanks in the Mustang… I absolutely feed on small details like that that just aren’t there in Il-2 since you only deal with a limited set of controls.
Il-2 brings me in a war simulation, while DCS brings me in the plane itself. If I were to tell you about things that I remember from flying a Spitfire or a Mustang in Il-2, I could tell you about some aerodynamic quirks, about attainable top speeds… but nothing that has to do with the plane’s identify or “character” in itself.
Il-2 is nice… But no matter how many hours I put into it, I could never tell you about the “V-for-victory/two-finger start” in the Spitfire when pushing the booster and starter coils… I couldn’t tell you about its awkward wobble pump lever that you need to crank a bazillion times to build up the fuel pressure in the lines, its identifier lights with the little switch that allows you to toggle them in a morse-code fashion, about how the P-8 compass needs to be adjusted manually with the course ring, about the safety switch I always forget when firing my guns…
Il-2 is a great game, but I never grew attached to any of its planes. The DCS WWII modules are planes that feel like true collectibles, something that I have an emotional attachment to, like it’s a “boots-in-the-pit” visceral experience. Every time I fly in Il-2, I just want to play with the switches and touch everything, like a child in a toy store. DCS allows me to do that, Il-2 doesn’t. This is why I think DCS WWII deserves to be.
17 Likes
See, I can agree with this; it’s why I can’t completely throw DCS WWII out, because it does a fantastic job of simulating the planes. The problem is that – for me – it’s not MSFS and I don’t play DCS purely to fly the planes around; I play it to learn how to fly the plane and fight in it. This gives me far more appreciation for the young men and women who had to fly them for real, under chaotic conditions where nothing was certain. The pressure of trying to make a gun pass on an enemy fighter; of trying to hold things steady before you pickle the bomb; of hoping that just one of your rockets strikes true – all of that combined with the pressure of knowing and managing my aircraft properly.
Otherwise, MSFS2020 is going to absolutely clobber everybody’s business in the “just flying” department.
3 Likes
Post of the month, and it’s only the 4th!