*** Official DCS World Thread ***

ED forums appears to be down

I wonder if they accidentally banned the entire internet ?
or
Did they delete the entire forums by mistake (instead of just deleting any thread that says anything remotely critical) ?
 
Ah, come on, they are the ONLY company in the world that make high fidelity combat flight sims, criticism of a monopoly is pointless for one;) If they want to make a flight museum with an occasional full immersion full realism experience (read A10c, Huey, Mi8 and Ka50) - nothing's gonna convince them otherwise. Plus, I understand they operate at a loss, and are sponsored by Nick Gray of Fighter Collection- so yeah... beyond market forces, like BBC :D (not always a bad thing, BBC makes some really top notch programs and has some really cool and passionate people, just like ED- precisely because it is outside of market influences with their dumb common denominator:)
 
No company could operate at a loss forever , it wouldn't be around for long before going under surely?

Your BBC analogy is not a good example , BBC actually produce finished shows

ED just seem to churn out n endless amount of Beta products

One thread on ED had some people pointing this out in a polite manner and that they would not be buying any more Beta products until the current Beta's were finished eg huey , MI-8 and the sabre (from Betasimtek) and the MIG-21
All of these post megically get dissappeared by the "mods" , not cool
 
Last edited:
No company? Man City and Monaco football clubs? From what I understand DCS/ED is subsidised by some millionaire Nick Gray who owns a stable of real ww2 birds, so analogy above footy clubs is not too stretched ;)

Deleting threads is ugly, I agree. They deleted sever years worth of 777 threads last year when this il2:CLOD Ilya shevchenko guy became their partner - I absolutely hated it. But endless amounts of betas?

I personally have no gripes with them, I have Huey, Ka50, A10c, FC3 and Dora - every single product is absolute world class in terms of engineering and even in terms of gameplay (campaigns, missions, training- best in the genre (yes I play a bit of Falcon sometimes too, so I know about its campaign). So I'm just very happy these guys exist to be honest :)

Unfinished? Not sure in what way Huey is unfinished? I 'd love to have troops animations for loading unloading, but apart from that its an amazing experience of a helicopter. I suppose I could write on their forums about troops animations until blue in the face and I'm sure I'd be banned/deleted eventually:) But, I enjoy it for what it is - the best chopper simulation in the world (yes, even in this beta form) and will enjoy it more once animations are in. Same with other stuff I guess.

And also we should note that Huey, Mi-8, Sabre, Mig21, are NOT ED products, they are 3rd party. ED's a10c, ka50, p51 are complete and finished, Dora is beta (already flies better that any other non DCS/777 prop plane out there) but it came out in August.

DCS physics fidelity:
Nobody does it better :)
 
Last edited:
Not that the Huey does not have engine temp handling eg you can run the hell out of the engine and it will take is (super engine mod maybe?)

MI8 has no manual ..... so very hard to use the more complex systems , I would also like the lighting sorted out

I am not bothering with he sabre unless it is really cheap or they actually finish it.

Betasimtek are ED Partners (the only one) they work very closely with ED and for all intents and purposes are ED eg share resources

Huey , still needs work
MI8 , also needs finised off and completed
Sabre , also needs finishing off

My point is how about finishing off what you started before working on something else and then ignoring what you have already got the money for?

I think that if another company were to directly start competing with ED it might make things better for the consumer, maybe they would stop half assing it so much and act better toward the people who support them.

I LOVE to fly helicopters , I would probably love it more when stuff like the trees not being able to be flown through is fixed , but been waiting 6 years for that so won''t hold my breath.

Dedicated server , other software has this sorted very early on , we are still waiting for it 6 years later with promises that we will get it sometime in the future

I like DCS but I am not deluded by the fanboi factor and do realize that it could be so much more that it is today.

The multiplayer interface looks like the guy who wrote it is stuck in a time warp from the 90's. Look at the way arma can allow you to create a single shortcut to launch the game and connect to a server , it is so much better than ED's implementation

I could go on forever about how it could be made better , but stuff that like just gets you banned from their forums or shouted down by the fanbois
 
Could you point me to some Huey threads that discuss its"super engine"? I'm genuinely interested.

Belsimtek are close partners but stil not ED, otherwise they would be called ED;) ED still makes planes (The Dora is here and F/A-18 is on the horizon), Belsimtek is involved on other projects. I'll just be a devil's advocate here and say that "finishing" a very high fidelity sim is philosophically impossible or near enough. Also it is financially impossible, or near enough. For example, just the physics model of FW-190 Dora costs $120.000 to make (according to ED chief engineer! I wonder how much does an F/a-18 physics model cost? :D). Lets say something is wrong - the plane deviates form the real data graph in some particular aspect. Correcting the problem is not a matter of correcting a few numbers in an Excel, as most of the equations are interconnected and change in one place leads to unwanted changes in another - and who is to pay for all that? From what I've read, they build models and do small wind tunnel tests- it's all super-super complicated and costly.

Everything has a downside- if your aerodynamics are simple then creating a plane that matches real data in terms of speed, climb, turning etc is straight forward and cheap but the plane/chopper is on rails and has awful stall behaviour (FSX). If your aerodynamics are super complicated like DCS, then stall behaviour and flight feel are great but matching everything perfectly with a real performance table is very hard/expensive. I think only the A-10c that was funded by the pentagon is *perfect* in every way, other modules have compromises in matching real data- but with great aerodynamics. (Falcon BMS has wrong stall behaviour btw :p I still love it though)

And the thing is that even with mistakes (like Dora initially had something wrong with its rudder airflow) DCS planes are amazing anyway, nobody does aerodynamics like DCS/777, so its an absolute joy to fly. Same with Huey - superengine or not, no other non DCS chopper is even close to its feel, regardless of how accurate their thrust, speed, temperature tolerance etc are.

I guess the short answer is dont buy a module with which you are not happy at the time of purchase :)
 
Borsch said:
Could you point me to some Huey threads that discuss its"super engine"? I'm genuinely interested.

Belsimtek are close partners but stil not ED, otherwise they would be called ED;) ED still makes planes (The Dora is here and F/A-18 is on the horizon), Belsimtek is involved on other projects. I'll just be a devil's advocate here and say that "finishing" a very high fidelity sim is philosophically impossible or near enough. Also it is financially impossible, or near enough. For example, just the physics model of FW-190 Dora costs $120.000 to make (according to ED chief engineer! I wonder how much does an F/a-18 physics model cost? :D). Lets say something is wrong - the plane deviates form the real data graph in some particular aspect. Correcting the problem is not a matter of correcting a few numbers in an Excel, as most of the equations are interconnected and change in one place leads to unwanted changes in another - and who is to pay for all that? From what I've read, they build models and do small wind tunnel tests- it's all super-super complicated and costly.

Everything has a downside- if your aerodynamics are simple then creating a plane that matches real data in terms of speed, climb, turning etc is straight forward and cheap but the plane/chopper is on rails and has awful stall behaviour (FSX). If your aerodynamics are super complicated like DCS, then stall behaviour and flight feel are great but matching everything perfectly with a real performance table is very hard/expensive. I think only the A-10c that was funded by the pentagon is *perfect* in every way, other modules have compromises in matching real data- but with great aerodynamics. (Falcon BMS has wrong stall behaviour btw :p I still love it though)

And the thing is that even with mistakes (like Dora initially had something wrong with its rudder airflow) DCS planes are amazing anyway, nobody does aerodynamics like DCS/777, so its an absolute joy to fly. Same with Huey - superengine or not, no other non DCS chopper is even close to its feel, regardless of how accurate their thrust, speed, temperature tolerance etc are.

I guess the short answer is dont buy a module with which you are not happy at the time of purchase :)
Click to expand...

Could you point me to some Huey threads that discuss its"super engine"? I'm genuinely interested.
Sorry buddy , just keep using the search function on ED forums , if you are lucky you will see one of the posts regarding this before the mods delete it ...

It is difficult to decide which module to to buy because it is not like you could reference a thread or list of known bugs , they don't want people to be able to see these sorts of things, they prefer to keep you in the dark.
 
Just found this from Belsimtek spokesman :)

Just want to chip in here quickly. We indeed built up some ground to make up and we do see the signs of frustration. We will not leave any of our products "hanging" with major incomplete features. By major features I mean whole elements like training missions and manuals. These will be completed and updated where necessary. Some code features like AI gunners, sling loads or engine overheat are by their nature more fluid and difficult to pin down, but still I believe we will accomplish all of our goals and planned features. Ultimately our stake is in producing quality products and even if with some growing pains, we will work to meet the standards we set for ourselves and we know you expect of us.

This year has turned out particularly challenging in that we ended up falling behind on some key features while making unusually quick progress on developing numerous technologies, modules, and projects. On the one hand it's very exciting to see DCS technology and product variety develop at this faster pace, on the other hand it further extended our deficit. We are making adjustments (for example now have more hired staff to work on document translation) and will complete everything we set out to.
Click to expand...
http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2199723&postcount=34
 
lurkio said:
It is difficult to decide which module to to buy because it is not like you could reference a thread or list of known bugs , they don't want people to be able to see these sorts of things, they prefer to keep you in the dark.
Click to expand...

Not to fear though, we have intrepid investigators like yourself to keep the masses informed about their deceptions.

Nate
 
Nate--IRL-- said:
Not to fear though, we have intrepid investigators like yourself to keep the masses informed about their deceptions.

Nate
Click to expand...

Sorry but I aint got time to create a thread for each aircraft and then populate it with the know bugs (which would actually be helpful for bug reporting it would stop the same stuff being reported again and again)

Maybe you could do it Nate ? Take some time off going round from forum to forum like the other shills and trying to quash all posts not extolling the virtues of ED

Also try to have a breath of fresh air once in a while and remove your head from ED's rectum
 
If someone is mature enough to attempt to get into DCS I don't think they need Nate telling when and what to buy. If he is involved in the development he seems like a pretty good representative for the company.

I still have no desire to drop £25 on the other modules because I have lots to learn with the A10 and Huey. I don't have a desire to purchase the other modules due to lack of interest.

A Kiowa, Apache or Loach module would get my interest.
 
The A-10 will keep you busy, but by far the Huey is the most fun to fly module there is. IMO you have the best two already. I believe one 3rd party company, VEAO Simulations, has an Apache, a Westland Apache, in it's long term plans.

Nate
 
Nope, they've removed the Apache from the plans. So at the moment nobody has announced producing one, for commercial release at least.

Much like the Viper for fixed wing, arguably the most popular and desired rotary wing airframe in the western market and nobody is making it. That we know of.
 
Personally I think, unless they've massively expanded recently, VEAO are verrry optimistic with their roadmap, especially given how long their hawk is taking. Don't get me wrong the hawk looks bloody awesome, the guys behind it seem like a good bunch and some previous development issues should be a thing of the past in future products but going from 2 1/2+ years to make 1 aircraft to churning out 10 in 2015 alone is rather hard to believe.
 
Regarding Belsimtek, or ED I guess because apparently it's ultimately up to them...
If they can't deliver multi-crew I'm going to be slightly disappointed as part of my purchase on the huey was for that.

If they can't then hopefully they'll give us a discount code, I heard it's supposed to come with 2.0 considering the L39(?) should have multicrew.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom