BMS is so built into my younger DNA that I don’t find it particularly complex. There are 1500 pages in the docs folder. Of those, the two biggest manuals are the F16 -1 and -34. Both are pretty essential reading in order to use the sim effectively. I doubt that I have it in me to take on such a load today. That I did it in my 30s and 40s means that it is all baked in and I can just enjoy each improvement as it comes.
7 Likes
Excellent point. The hill to climb is steep and many don’t find climbing it fun. I get it - they want to start at, or near, the end. Is time-consuming otherwise.
1 Like
Exactly, it also helped that if you followed the Falcon 4 modding developement (SuperPaks, Allied Force, BMS etc) it all was introduced gradually and you learned new features as they were being implemented. Now imagine you are starting from scratch and need to learn all of this in one go. TBH nowadays I wouldn’t have patience for that.
For a new flight sim coming to the market to be succesfull I think it needs to scale down the “rivet count” part and invest more in immersion and world-building. Something on par with realistic flight sims of late 90s like vanilla Falcon 4, Jane’s F-15 or Digital Image Design’s Total Air War for systems modelling would be enough, just build convincing battlefield with dynamic campaign and you have title many would jump into.
I’ve been enjoying VTOL VR in pancake mode with HOTAS (there are mods for this) and it’s really fun and reminescent of those late 90s sims in regards of systems modelling. If something like this was coupled with real-life aircrafts, dynamic campaign and better graphics I wouldn’t be flying anything else (apart from retro sims which will always have a place on my disk).
6 Likes
I think we focus too much on the total capability of a platform, particularly in DCS. In reality, squadrons tend(ed, least with the older jets we have in our sims) to specialise in a role.
For example, I’m pretty good in the A2A and Anti-Radar missions (using HARM and unguided bombs) in the F-16C in DCS. Not a clue how to use PGMs in that platform - because I know how to do that in the Hornet. I’ll learn it at some point. But I’m not getting cut up about it.
Now, it’d be even more fun if we had a campaign system where you could restrict your squadrons roles, for example… maybe that’s something that could help? (Edit: I’m pretty sure you can do that in the F4 campaign, or at least just pick the missions you’re comfortable doing. But F4 could use a UI update…)
3 Likes
The F4 UI works for me. I wouldn’t change it. 1st, it is both 2D and VR. THAT should be considered essential in any sim. Yet none outside of BMS succeed at doing it. The UI itself may not look stunning but compare it to DCS in functionality. I mean, there is simply no contest. In BMS you can plan the snot out of your flight with lines, boxes, threatpoints, wingman assignments, CMS programs and so on. And this assumes we just want to be a pilot. But the GUI also lets us be a battlefield commander. Oh! and we get to watch the war in real time.
Could it look better? Heck yes it could. But I fear that if it did it would also work slower. So I chose to see the low-res as a feature, not a flaw.
4 Likes
I’m just a bit put off by the buttons that open windows with more buttons (I want to say that open more windows, but that might just be PTS)… it might have improved since I last seriously dived into it but yeah, it’s a complex sim.
I’m not worried by the graphics much, just the usability. But again, it’s been years since I did an F4 campaign 
1 Like
Gotcha. No. You’re right. I’ve been playing it since Allied Force in 2008. Yet, today, I still don’t know what the buttons are supposed to represent. I know the button for JSTARS. But what’s that image on the button supposed to be? No idea. Loadout? No idea. They might as well be Chinese characters.
1 Like
If I might second Torc, in 1998 Falcon was great because of the UI.
Today, Falcon is great despite it. With the greater resolutions and fidelity, the UI could be much improved. I’ve been playing for several years (not as long as @smokinhole) and like him, have it figured out and it works, but it could certainly be cleaned up and made more user friendly.
Cleaning up the DTC process (please don’t grab your pitchforks and form a lynch mob 
) where you have to do the whole clicking dance would be good too. And why not integrate the tools like MC and WDP right into the game now? Shouldn’t my kneeboards (which were ahead of their time compared to DCS, and only eclipsed in my opinion by the recent OpenKneeboard in VR) auto-populate, rather than me having to use an external tool to load them up?
1 Like
From what I recall (just observing and talking to a few pilots) that was true up until recently (I’ve not kept track lately).
I’ve already decided I’m going to focus on manual bombing (the system modeled anyway) in the Phantom, to include pop-up attacks and such.
I included this in my system (DEPLOYED[1]); everything is role-based and platform-type related, taken from the available Task value in the mission editor, with an adjustment for SEAD when there is no SEAD to perform (it changes the task to Ground Attack). Now, the squadron assignments likely don’t match but there are so few choices there (without requiring the user the download extras).
[1] I’m holding on version 0.935 as the introduction of the Apache has required some changes. Not many but enough to make me rewire some things. Waiting for the Phantom to drop to u/l the latest.
2 Likes
Yeah, the DCS ‘briefing’ - planning - is minimal (you can move your waypoints and look at a tiny image but not much else. This is a huge hole[1].
[1]I had to spend a year (and counting) to code something externally. It’s not much more functional but it has the freedom to be expanded - as I get the time.
4 Likes
If I can say something here (usually I’m silent) personally, I’m a little bit tired of realism BMS. I still like Falcon 4.0/BMS to be clear but true is that after our last Falcon meeting (2023), I’m not flying BMS for various reasons. That might be a bit surprise for you because you might think how interested I’m in BMS. Yes, I like realism but…
As was mentioned up, my role in our squadron has been also limited to focusing on bombing and SEAD. Don’t ask me why, simply it was more attractive for me. It’s funny because in times of Falcon 4.0 Super Pack 3 and DID F-22 TAW I was mainly dogfighter guy.
Nowadays, I feel that DID F-22 Total Air War (with the new engine and with a bit more realism) is exactly what I’m looking for. But looks like I need to program that simulator itself.
7 Likes
True again. But I think it is only fair to compare BMS not with what we want, but with what we got. When I fly DCS, the briefing is only what the mission creator gives me. I have zero idea what’s going on in the skies or on the ground. None. Same is true of IL2. VTOL is just now starting to hint at something better, at least in the MP briefing room. But for now, in single-player, it too gives me nothing. Those are the totality of the sims that I play. So within my limited scope in this hobby, there is one place where the briefing means anything more than “What’s the frequency for Team and Magic?”, and that’s BMS. Is it ugly? Sure. But man is it informative!
8 Likes
Very true. Sometimes I feel like a dog watching color tv though (or one trying to read an IFR Hi chart).
1 Like
FINE! I’m reinstalling it…
4 Likes
It’s a shame CAP2 didn’t get finished, I got a real good vibe from that game.
3 Likes
Microprose took it under its wings and it has been getting some behind the scenes updates (only “devtestmicroprose” branch which is not public - you can see them on SteamDB - https://steamdb.info/app/347170/depots/ ). So maybe we will get something nice from it eventually.
6 Likes
A gentleman of distinguished tastes. I approve. 
I came across a TAW / EF2K reboot page the other day…I need to give it a whirl…
1 Like
Since I will probably reinstall it- I am getting info on how to set up the controls…
4 Likes
Yay! I hope you find it way easier now. I still use the in-game UI instead and text-edit because I am old and resistant to change. But I think the front-end (launcher) UI is a more intuitive and better way to setup controls nearly effortlessly.
2 Likes
I am not entirely sure- we will see.
As of now there’s lots of ups and downs- but I digress.
Just happy to see positivity. That’s all.
1 Like