DCS Pilots, friends of the channel - I refer to a sub-par module in this video. The opinions in this video are that of my own. I'm not affiliated, or BOUND by any terms, and nor do I want to be.It's important to me to be able to say the good things, and the bad, especially when some of these early modules are not available for a free trial. I intend to review new stuff as it becomes available to the public, and not get a weeks early access on the proviso I only say good things - it doesn't matter what the NDA says, the little voice in my head would always say "good things only, or next months I won't be asked back." Sadly there's others who already tried to do both, and it generally doesn't work.
I so agree with your worries regarding the maps. Also I do not understand why ED focuses on super detailed models of AI-planes you most often will see from afar anyhow, when we have soldiers and ground units that need a MAJOR AI-overhaul. Breaks the immersion when you are attacking soldiers with 30 mm cannon and soldiers are just standing there and firing back at you. No desire to take cover or do other smart moves.
yeah those AI robotic moves that often just choose between standing or running in slow motion, or running. Adding a "walk" animation and a "duck/prone" animation would be great (also shrinking target hitbox to reflect the crouch / prone position) and if they have access to cover nearby (ie building/tree etc) to run towards there would be MASSIVE upgrade... I agree focusing on the rivets and such for AI modules, looks great, but aside from the cinematic zooms (which lets face it, great for videos, does zero for gameplayer experience).
I think you are spot on with your worries though. My hope is that ED steps up the development of the world around these modules in 2023 big time. In my opinion it really is falling behind and killing it and no new module can safe that for me. A day in the life of a virtual default DCS(imulator) pilot: Starting up the plane, ‘talk’ to an ATC with the same voice since LOMAC with the same 3 incomplete lines that can’t handle 5 planes moving on ground the same time, taxying out on a deserted airfield, switching over to Awacs thats giving me bogey dopes of 30 planes 300 miles away (that I can’t order them to ignore) but fail to notice me on the one on 20 miles. Going for a drink behind the same 3 AAR modules (of which one is incomplete) for ages without any new modules in sight to later return to the same or different deserted airfield. If not manually placed, scripted AI the world is repetitive and sterile. And it is thanks to 3rd party scripts (MOOSE, Mist, CTLD, Skynet etc etc) that I am able to make some kind of fun, ‘dynamic’ world around my plane. Even the ‘super carrier’ module fails in this regard and that is worrisome. It just another empty airstrip with a few man standing on the launch area. No deck crew / equipment to assist you while boarding, fueling, loading, taxying whatever. No other movement of anything unless you tell it to do so by spending hours and hours in the editor. Enough of a rant from me 🤣 back to the F16 we go.
You are so right. Have the absolute same feeling. Still I play and enjoy DCS, but it could have been so much better if they had a better and more balanced road map for the different parts of the game (e.g world)
Thanks for the further info, it first flew March '45, but didn't enter frontline service until a year later. I love the ww2 era aircraft. I would like to see ED "standardise" the engines/oil warming procedures a bit, by that I mean, as of now, the 2 aircraft that require a "warm up" get significantly less usage Vs the others on combat servers, and I'm sure this is in part down to a 30sec startup Vs a few minutes. Even just an option mission editor side fake an "electric blanket" to have the oil pre-heated would help even this out, as used back then especially in the colder months
Umm.....there are no trees on the Falklands! It's too inhospitable, too windy, for any major forests/woodland/coppices to survive. So, to rate a map by the lack of trees....at least understand if trees are there or not.
I agree with you there's no "major forests" but that's a bit different from lack of any trees at all. A quick image search shows there being trees dotted about an otherwise baron landscape.
I like to think of Marianas as a South East Asia map for now. It's not very large but the scenery is decent and i think if there were more vietnam war planes like the a-1 and huey it'd be much more fun to do low level ops over a WWII scenery. I'm also still waiting for the A-4 mod to become a free official module (please ed, please). Sadly the pacific theatre is not very well covered yet but i'm looking forward to what is possible with the addition of a-1 and f-4.
I actually really like the Marianas map now (i know it lagged a lot more in early releases) and did my latest "hurricane vid" there. I am surprised more people don't use it, and can only assume the earlier performance issues put them off longer-term.
The thing that makes me really upset about DCS is the fact that every single thing that come along seems completely random. I'd like to see a sort of tech tree road map for some sceneries like for example the wwii. In a wwii theatre is mandatory to have a lot of different planes. We have already 2 maps and some warbirds but nobody use it most of all in multilayer becouse the fleet is waaay too small to make an enjoyable map. I'm talking about wwii but it apply in all the other theatres.
I agree. I honestly could care less about D and C tier cold war aircraft. Give use some more Gen 4 modules that can actually compete or something actually interesting like a B1. I have no idea why they are wasting time with the C130 or any unarmed aircraft for that matter.
I agree the "things that come along seem random" - although I guess with a lot of third party dev's, this is something increasingly outside EDs hands. To be fair about the C130 (as a transporter, refueler, and just a "big plane") I know this is something that I have read often in chats that players wanted to see. It massively opens up mission designer possibilities, and it will encourage more teamwork in MP (how many servers have invincible support aircraft these days?). Will it be the best selling module ever? I doubt it, but I know there's gonna be a demand for it, and on those longer missions, I can see "anyone flying a tanker near Nalchik?" type messages becoming a regular feature... The problem with more advanced modules (I include gen.4 and B1 in that) is the age-old problem of "too much of the systems are still classified....." and we know from past experience, what happens to ED developers who get hold of manuals, even via a legit source, that some other country says they shouldn't have. Let's hope they come up with something you will enjoy soon enough, I know most of the time I fly the Hornet/Viper just because of the "newer stuff" and obviously the EF2000 is something I am looking forward to, just a shame it's gone a tad radio silent since heatblur merged.
@@DCSDigitalCombatSimulator I meant the g91 but maybe I just seen it on there own Facebook not via ED officially announced ! That was already ages ago ! Looks pretty advanced already in development
I just bought the Syrian map, went to download it and got a message I am out of hard drive space. I don't know how that's possible, I checked and have over 24 GB free. Apparently that's not enough for DCS. So, I am dead in the water for additional content I guess until I get a larger hard drive. What a pisser. Anyone ever get into this mess? How did you get out of it, if you did? Any help will be really...helpful? lol you know what I mean. Liked and subbed!
Hey man, thanks for the nice comments, and sorry to hear this situation - a bummer indeed. I'm not sure if this will help, but I can tell you that DCS modules (especially maps and big updates) requires more space during the download/install process, then afterwards - it may well use the actual space it claims at that point, although I can't say... In other words, if there's something else on your drive you can temporarily move away to get over the initial installation, then bring it back. Unfortunately I have no idea exactly how much this will be, but consider the download size + install size a safe "minimum" bet.
@@DCSDigitalCombatSimulator I filed a ticket with ED and they sent me a link on the procedure for relocating the maps to a different drive. My hard drive is only 500 gig and I not only have DCS on that, but MSFS 2020 and X-Plane 11. Just too small of a disk for all that. I have a 4 terabyte disk on order and I will transfer everything else off and leave DCS as the only sim on the drive. That should solve my issue. Thanks for the feedback.
as an Italian, I just can't fucking stand the fact that every Italian aircraft shown in any fucking videogame or simulator is always the luftwaffe version, yes okay, the luftwaffe is nice, it's well organized and our air force is a little bit worse, but come on, what the fucking hell, the g.91 was a fucking Italian jet, IT WAS MADE BY FIAT, and still, people always show the luftwaffe one.
You raise a really good and valid point. Too much time and content is spent focusing on the "big boys" at the ignorance of "the others". Italy also had a huge navy, and was not insignificant by any stretch, and I am guilty of this as much as anyone, and it is something I'm going to be conscious of and take onboard for future videos.
@@DCSDigitalCombatSimulator don't get me wrong, our air force is bad organized, and our Eurofighters are very old, they didn't get updated so the RWR and the radar have some issues, but. BUT. Our industries like FUCKING LEONARDO which developed even the Apache, don't get much recognition, but they should
I think you are spot on with your worries though. My hope is that ED steps up the development of the world around these modules in 2023 big time. In my opinion it really is falling behind and killing it and no new module can safe that for me. A day in the life of a virtual default DCS(imulator) pilot: Starting up the plane, ‘talk’ to an ATC with the same voice since LOMAC with the same 3 incomplete lines that can’t handle 5 planes moving on ground the same time, taxying out on a deserted airfield, switching over to Awacs thats giving me bogey dopes of 30 planes 300 miles away (that I can’t order them to ignore) but fail to notice me on the one on 20 miles. Going for a drink behind the same 3 AAR modules (of which one is incomplete) for ages without any new modules in sight to later return to the same or different deserted airfield. If not manually placed, scripted AI the world is repetitive and sterile. And it is thanks to 3rd party scripts (MOOSE, Mist, CTLD, Skynet etc etc) that I am able to make some kind of fun, ‘dynamic’ world around my plane. Even the ‘super carrier’ module fails in this regard and that is worrisome. It just another empty airstrip with a few man standing on the launch area. No deck crew / equipment to assist you while boarding, fueling, loading, taxying whatever. No other movement of anything unless you tell it to do so by spending hours and hours in the editor. Enough of a rant from me 🤣 back to the F16 we go.
I'm sure I read somewhere some years back that ATC was being reworked big time, and it might have been one of those things that just went off onto the back burner. I've heard several people talk about the "dead feeling" inside missions, and we do owe a lot to the mission makers and script makers who go to huge lengths to try and inject some life into the missions / ai stuff and goto lengths to script things out... infact you give me a little idea, on a small video I could do, how to add scripted (ie voice) into mission editing stuff, so that more mission editors can put these in. Even just a few lines adds a whole lot - done in the right places, especially SP missions.
DCS Pilots, friends of the channel - I refer to a sub-par module in this video. The opinions in this video are that of my own. I'm not affiliated, or BOUND by any terms, and nor do I want to be.It's important to me to be able to say the good things, and the bad, especially when some of these early modules are not available for a free trial. I intend to review new stuff as it becomes available to the public, and not get a weeks early access on the proviso I only say good things - it doesn't matter what the NDA says, the little voice in my head would always say "good things only, or next months I won't be asked back." Sadly there's others who already tried to do both, and it generally doesn't work.
It because there are no trees on the falklands dude
Oh, I hope they will update the textures of the older modules, like the 2 Su-25, Ka-50, F-5 and others I think
I so agree with your worries regarding the maps. Also I do not understand why ED focuses on super detailed models of AI-planes you most often will see from afar anyhow, when we have soldiers and ground units that need a MAJOR AI-overhaul. Breaks the immersion when you are attacking soldiers with 30 mm cannon and soldiers are just standing there and firing back at you. No desire to take cover or do other smart moves.
yeah those AI robotic moves that often just choose between standing or running in slow motion, or running. Adding a "walk" animation and a "duck/prone" animation would be great (also shrinking target hitbox to reflect the crouch / prone position) and if they have access to cover nearby (ie building/tree etc) to run towards there would be MASSIVE upgrade... I agree focusing on the rivets and such for AI modules, looks great, but aside from the cinematic zooms (which lets face it, great for videos, does zero for gameplayer experience).
I think you are spot on with your worries though.
My hope is that ED steps up the development of the world around these modules in 2023 big time. In my opinion it really is falling behind and killing it and no new module can safe that for me.
A day in the life of a virtual default DCS(imulator) pilot:
Starting up the plane, ‘talk’ to an ATC with the same voice since LOMAC with the same 3 incomplete lines that can’t handle 5 planes moving on ground the same time, taxying out on a deserted airfield, switching over to Awacs thats giving me bogey dopes of 30 planes 300 miles away (that I can’t order them to ignore) but fail to notice me on the one on 20 miles. Going for a drink behind the same 3 AAR modules (of which one is incomplete) for ages without any new modules in sight to later return to the same or different deserted airfield.
If not manually placed, scripted AI the world is repetitive and sterile. And it is thanks to 3rd party scripts (MOOSE, Mist, CTLD, Skynet etc etc) that I am able to make some kind of fun, ‘dynamic’ world around my plane.
Even the ‘super carrier’ module fails in this regard and that is worrisome. It just another empty airstrip with a few man standing on the launch area. No deck crew / equipment to assist you while boarding, fueling, loading, taxying whatever. No other movement of anything unless you tell it to do so by spending hours and hours in the editor.
Enough of a rant from me 🤣 back to the F16 we go.
You are so right. Have the absolute same feeling. Still I play and enjoy DCS, but it could have been so much better if they had a better and more balanced road map for the different parts of the game (e.g world)
Good video, interesting information!
Cheers Bob
skyraider was actually post ww2, it went in production right after the war ended and mainly saw use in Korea and Vietnam
Thanks for the further info, it first flew March '45, but didn't enter frontline service until a year later. I love the ww2 era aircraft. I would like to see ED "standardise" the engines/oil warming procedures a bit, by that I mean, as of now, the 2 aircraft that require a "warm up" get significantly less usage Vs the others on combat servers, and I'm sure this is in part down to a 30sec startup Vs a few minutes. Even just an option mission editor side fake an "electric blanket" to have the oil pre-heated would help even this out, as used back then especially in the colder months
Umm.....there are no trees on the Falklands! It's too inhospitable, too windy, for any major forests/woodland/coppices to survive. So, to rate a map by the lack of trees....at least understand if trees are there or not.
I agree with you there's no "major forests" but that's a bit different from lack of any trees at all. A quick image search shows there being trees dotted about an otherwise baron landscape.
I like to think of Marianas as a South East Asia map for now. It's not very large but the scenery is decent and i think if there were more vietnam war planes like the a-1 and huey it'd be much more fun to do low level ops over a WWII scenery. I'm also still waiting for the A-4 mod to become a free official module (please ed, please). Sadly the pacific theatre is not very well covered yet but i'm looking forward to what is possible with the addition of a-1 and f-4.
I actually really like the Marianas map now (i know it lagged a lot more in early releases) and did my latest "hurricane vid" there. I am surprised more people don't use it, and can only assume the earlier performance issues put them off longer-term.
The thing that makes me really upset about DCS is the fact that every single thing that come along seems completely random. I'd like to see a sort of tech tree road map for some sceneries like for example the wwii. In a wwii theatre is mandatory to have a lot of different planes. We have already 2 maps and some warbirds but nobody use it most of all in multilayer becouse the fleet is waaay too small to make an enjoyable map. I'm talking about wwii but it apply in all the other theatres.
I agree. I honestly could care less about D and C tier cold war aircraft. Give use some more Gen 4 modules that can actually compete or something actually interesting like a B1. I have no idea why they are wasting time with the C130 or any unarmed aircraft for that matter.
I agree the "things that come along seem random" - although I guess with a lot of third party dev's, this is something increasingly outside EDs hands. To be fair about the C130 (as a transporter, refueler, and just a "big plane") I know this is something that I have read often in chats that players wanted to see. It massively opens up mission designer possibilities, and it will encourage more teamwork in MP (how many servers have invincible support aircraft these days?). Will it be the best selling module ever? I doubt it, but I know there's gonna be a demand for it, and on those longer missions, I can see "anyone flying a tanker near Nalchik?" type messages becoming a regular feature... The problem with more advanced modules (I include gen.4 and B1 in that) is the age-old problem of "too much of the systems are still classified....." and we know from past experience, what happens to ED developers who get hold of manuals, even via a legit source, that some other country says they shouldn't have. Let's hope they come up with something you will enjoy soon enough, I know most of the time I fly the Hornet/Viper just because of the "newer stuff" and obviously the EF2000 is something I am looking forward to, just a shame it's gone a tad radio silent since heatblur merged.
Wasn’t that announced already a while ago ?
The G91R info and screenies was the only new info, the others I wanted to roundup just how many new announcements we have in the pipework
@@DCSDigitalCombatSimulator I meant the g91 but maybe I just seen it on there own Facebook not via ED officially announced ! That was already ages ago ! Looks pretty advanced already in development
Multi player focused users of DCS forget that their is a large group of DCS players that do not care about multiplayer.
I just bought the Syrian map, went to download it and got a message I am out of hard drive space. I don't know how that's possible, I checked and have over 24 GB free. Apparently that's not enough for DCS. So, I am dead in the water for additional content I guess until I get a larger hard drive. What a pisser. Anyone ever get into this mess? How did you get out of it, if you did? Any help will be really...helpful? lol you know what I mean. Liked and subbed!
Hey man, thanks for the nice comments, and sorry to hear this situation - a bummer indeed. I'm not sure if this will help, but I can tell you that DCS modules (especially maps and big updates) requires more space during the download/install process, then afterwards - it may well use the actual space it claims at that point, although I can't say...
In other words, if there's something else on your drive you can temporarily move away to get over the initial installation, then bring it back. Unfortunately I have no idea exactly how much this will be, but consider the download size + install size a safe "minimum" bet.
@@DCSDigitalCombatSimulator I filed a ticket with ED and they sent me a link on the procedure for relocating the maps to a different drive. My hard drive is only 500 gig and I not only have DCS on that, but MSFS 2020 and X-Plane 11. Just too small of a disk for all that. I have a 4 terabyte disk on order and I will transfer everything else off and leave DCS as the only sim on the drive. That should solve my issue. Thanks for the feedback.
@@valuedhumanoid6574 I have a 1 TB drive just for DCS. MSFS is a huge hog when it comes to storage also.
@@Mightymoose02 Yes it is! When I got my new gaming PC I thought a 500 gig HD would be plenty big enough. Man was I wrong.
Frecce Tricolori is italian
Thank you. I knew someone would put me right!
Frecce Tricolori is the Italian AirForce aerobatic team... they're not french...
Much appreciated. It looked French, but I felt my gut go as I said it, thanks for putting me right
@@DCSDigitalCombatSimulator Np :D
Still waiting on a B-52
you think someone will ever make a B-52 playable? a multi-crew job for sure if they do
as an Italian, I just can't fucking stand the fact that every Italian aircraft shown in any fucking videogame or simulator is always the luftwaffe version, yes okay, the luftwaffe is nice, it's well organized and our air force is a little bit worse, but come on, what the fucking hell, the g.91 was a fucking Italian jet, IT WAS MADE BY FIAT, and still, people always show the luftwaffe one.
You raise a really good and valid point. Too much time and content is spent focusing on the "big boys" at the ignorance of "the others". Italy also had a huge navy, and was not insignificant by any stretch, and I am guilty of this as much as anyone, and it is something I'm going to be conscious of and take onboard for future videos.
@@DCSDigitalCombatSimulator don't get me wrong, our air force is bad organized, and our Eurofighters are very old, they didn't get updated so the RWR and the radar have some issues, but. BUT. Our industries like FUCKING LEONARDO which developed even the Apache, don't get much recognition, but they should
I think you are spot on with your worries though.
My hope is that ED steps up the development of the world around these modules in 2023 big time. In my opinion it really is falling behind and killing it and no new module can safe that for me.
A day in the life of a virtual default DCS(imulator) pilot:
Starting up the plane, ‘talk’ to an ATC with the same voice since LOMAC with the same 3 incomplete lines that can’t handle 5 planes moving on ground the same time, taxying out on a deserted airfield, switching over to Awacs thats giving me bogey dopes of 30 planes 300 miles away (that I can’t order them to ignore) but fail to notice me on the one on 20 miles. Going for a drink behind the same 3 AAR modules (of which one is incomplete) for ages without any new modules in sight to later return to the same or different deserted airfield.
If not manually placed, scripted AI the world is repetitive and sterile. And it is thanks to 3rd party scripts (MOOSE, Mist, CTLD, Skynet etc etc) that I am able to make some kind of fun, ‘dynamic’ world around my plane.
Even the ‘super carrier’ module fails in this regard and that is worrisome. It just another empty airstrip with a few man standing on the launch area. No deck crew / equipment to assist you while boarding, fueling, loading, taxying whatever. No other movement of anything unless you tell it to do so by spending hours and hours in the editor.
Enough of a rant from me 🤣 back to the F16 we go.
I'm sure I read somewhere some years back that ATC was being reworked big time, and it might have been one of those things that just went off onto the back burner. I've heard several people talk about the "dead feeling" inside missions, and we do owe a lot to the mission makers and script makers who go to huge lengths to try and inject some life into the missions / ai stuff and goto lengths to script things out... infact you give me a little idea, on a small video I could do, how to add scripted (ie voice) into mission editing stuff, so that more mission editors can put these in. Even just a few lines adds a whole lot - done in the right places, especially SP missions.