Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable

[AKIron]

In a high realism sim it seems many prefer to learn one aircraft thoroughly and become very experienced with it, proving their competence. I'm an input junkie. I want a constant stream of new stuff to learn. Different strokes.

[CptTrips]

Seems Arma 3 has been used to fool people also. Have seen some war videos made with that which could have fooled me.

You know you need to take a break when you go outside to enjoy the sunset and look at the sky with a peach-orange glow on the horizon fading out to Prussian blue, and wispy fingers of clouds, lavender in the shadows, the edges lit bright by the last golden rays of the setting sun; and your first thought is, "Jeez, these graphics are beautiful.  It almost looks like DCS." 

 

[oboe]

I definitely have some interest in Korea, especially if it includes carrier ops with F9F Panther.   

If, however, IL-2 had chosen instead to implement crewed two- and four-engine bombers as an extension to the Great Battles series, I think they would've become the dominant sim.   I think IL-2 Korea will end up being sortof an also-ran.   The Mig-15 will likely be nearly unbeatable against everything (except possibly the Sabre),  and the combat apart from that should be mostly ground attack/interdiction.   I think there were some escorted B-29 missions as well.   But just not nearly the variety of so many aircraft and different theaters as continuing WWII development would allow.         

I'm still waiting for DCS to implement a late P-38J.   That would be incredible, as well as making their B-17 flyable.     

[AKIron]

I want an updated "Megafortress".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFcxI0ybIcc

[CptTrips]

One tangent thought, if the OP will allow... This thread got me thinking last night (usually dangerous), and I think I’ve had a bit of an epiphany.

I think I finally see what DCS plan is with WWII. 

DCS currently has a minimal start of a WWII ETO stable.  P51, Spit IX, P47, Mossie, 109k, 190D, a90A8.  A really nice channel\Normandy map.

But for some reason, instead of continuing on fleshing that out further, they are changing directions and doing WWII PTO stuff.  WTF????  That confused the heck out of me.  Why end up with two half implemented theaters???  Why change direction???

I have heard that their CEO has a preference for PTO because he loves carrier ops.  However, I now wonder if the main driver for the change is the new threat of Combat Pilot. 

I don’t think they have ever been threatened by IL2.  I think they believe they are higher fidelity and more advances and they can take that genre over at some point when they feel like it, or when they have consumed all the low hanging fruit in modern jet\rotary.  And now IL2 has lost the producer who turned their company around with the successful GB series.

They might be more concerned about the threat from Combat Pilot.  A new greenfield project starting from a new clean slate without a bunch of legacy technical debt to hold them back, led by a producer with a proven track record of success with a WWII product.  And from interviews, it is clear they are going to be leaning more toward DCS level fidelity than IL2.  Now that sounds like a threat to DCS’ fidelity dominance.

They may be moving to PTO to cut them off and establish a mature dominant product covering that theater before Combat Pilot can get up on it’s feet.  Making it hard for them to break in.  They have to directly compete against an entrenched large resource player, instead of being able to fill an unpopulated niche. 

I think DCS is moving to put more focus on WWII PTO to strangle the closest potential direct challenger in the crib.

Once that is secure, they can easily go back and finish what they were doing on ETO, especially now that IL2 is careening off into Korea.

$0.02

[edge12674]

That makes sense.  As a dedicated DCS player, Combat Pilot is the only other sim that has the potential to lure me away.  I think few want a high fidelity A6M5 more than I. 

The flight sim genre has graduated in its complexity.  This is evident not only in graphics and flight models, but even HOTAS hardware.  The bar has been raised and any sim not striving to meet it is in a state of decay. 

New players to the genre are not put off by a steep learning curve the way we old players are.  I look forward to WWII carrier ops where weather and sea state are factors to contend with.  I like that not only is the flight/damage/ballistics model accurate, but even things like aircraft tire physics are being implemented. 

[CptTrips]

The flight sim genre has graduated in its complexity.

Everything does as the computing power necessary to support it becomes available.

There are more complex\advanced tank sims than there ever were before. 

Even in the FPS realm you start having ARMA, Squad, Hell Let Loose, etc.

 

[RichardDarkwood]

For me the graphical and realism differences just do not outweigh the full service WWII experience we get here in AH.

Where is this realism you speak of in Aces High?

The answer is: Nowhere to be found.

The P-47 in DCS looks better sounds better and for sure flys more realistic. You cannot blow the motor up from diving with the cowl flaps open in Aces High, that is because you cannot control the cowl flaps in Aces High. Your calves aren't burning from brake steering a P-47 to take off. Making sure the tail wheel is disengaged on take-off.

You have to manage all kinds of systems in the DCS P-47 all while dog fighting and or ground attacking.

DCS is as real as your going to get as far as flight simulation. It is the top dog.

[Dadtallica]

Where is this realism you speak of in Aces High?

The answer is: Nowhere to be found.

The P-47 in DCS looks better sounds better and for sure flys more realistic. You cannot blow the motor up from diving with the cowl flaps open in Aces High, that is because you cannot control the cowl flaps in Aces High. Your calves aren't burning from brake steering a P-47 to take off. Making sure the tail wheel is disengaged on take-off.

You have to manage all kinds of systems in the DCS P-47 all while dog fighting and or ground attacking.

DCS is as real as your going to get as far as flight simulation. It is the top dog.

I guess reading comprehension is not your sharpest tool. I literally said none of that matters to me over the full service WWII sim we get.

[DmonSlyr]

I think there is a great deal of realism in AH. Not in plane mechanics or graphics, but in the fight itself. The scenario battles are pretty realistic. The full SA you need in AH is realistic. The nature and natural selection of humans in AH is incredibly realistic. Not being able to go into F3 mode. Having to always take off. The strategy aspects of the work maps. There are realistic qualities. The other games have not provided some of these things.

[AKIron]

All of us posting here have flown in Aces High. Some more than others but probably none measured in less than years. It's good so many still find it satisfying. I certainly would not deny anyone that.

[The Fugitive]

Where is this realism you speak of in Aces High?

The answer is: Nowhere to be found.

The P-47 in DCS looks better sounds better and for sure flys more realistic. You cannot blow the motor up from diving with the cowl flaps open in Aces High, that is because you cannot control the cowl flaps in Aces High. Your calves aren't burning from brake steering a P-47 to take off. Making sure the tail wheel is disengaged on take-off.

You have to manage all kinds of systems in the DCS P-47 all while dog fighting and or ground attacking.

DCS is as real as your going to get as far as flight simulation. It is the top dog.

Just curious, how many hours do you have in a real P47 ?

[AKIron]

I never flown anything other than light Pipers and Cessnas irl but try them yourself and see what you think. Costs you nothing but time. You want a real challenge try the DCS 109 but be sure to turn off the rudder assist which is on by default.

It's called "takeoff assist". To turn it off go to the options page, special, 109. Drag the slider to 0. A different ballgame.

[AKIron]

A person with no flight experience doesn't jump into one of these fighters, take off, and start shooting people down. While that can be fun it bears little resemblance to reality. How realistic DCS is in the WWII planes I don't know but I do know you have to spend time learning to fly these planes before you can think about fighting in them.

[GasTeddy]

That makes sense.  As a dedicated DCS player, Combat Pilot is the only other sim that has the potential to lure me away.  I think few want a high fidelity A6M5 more than I. 

The flight sim genre has graduated in its complexity.  This is evident not only in graphics and flight models, but even HOTAS hardware.  The bar has been raised and any sim not striving to meet it is in a state of decay. 

New players to the genre are not put off by a steep learning curve the way we old players are.  I look forward to WWII carrier ops where weather and sea state are factors to contend with.  I like that not only is the flight/damage/ballistics model accurate, but even things like aircraft tire physics are being implemented.

One thing noticeable with new players; they want to do it with keyboard and mouse or PlayStation.  My son and some his friends are very fond of WWII. They mostly tank in War Thunder and Enlisted, sometimes my son grabs an aircraft. I have T16000M + TWCS + TFRP, but no. They are just so computer/PlayStation orientated, they think sticks and pedals are old fashioned. Even I do not recall seeing WWII tank or aircraft having keyboard, mouse or game controller.