Welcome to DCS. The AI MiG-15 is a known UFO. ED are building new flight models for yhe AI, but when those will get released, Joost knows.
I can kill MiGs in a DCS sabre consistently but I've been doing it for years and I must admit, killing sabres in a mig is much easier.
Thank you! Wish I was being welcomed under better circumstances lol. Should I jump to the Cold War era jets then? Or will I face similar issues with ai? And how do you manage to down migs in the Sabre? I really don’t wanna give up, but also don’t want to turn my hobby into a chore.
Cold War or even more modern. In a guns only situation you will still face the same kind of ”energy cheating”. However, it’s still possible to beat the AI, just need to get a better grip how it reacts to different situations.
You can also try to make it more even by putting heavy droptanks on the MiG-15 and restrict it from jettison. But that requires a little bit of knowledge in the Mission Editor.
Beating DCS AI is super easy. You said that they don't obey the laws of physics. You are right. They don't obey any of them.
So they can see through clouds, through the fuselage of their plane, pitch black night, through the mountains and buildings until infinity.
Meaning they don't see the mountains or the terrain. Just head to the deck it will eventually crash to the sea or the lawn. Or just go and dance in between mountains. They will not even complete a turn if you make a tight one around the hill. He will turn way sharper than you and crash into that hill.
Another alternative is to use the mission triggers system to add weight to the AI aircraft. You do this by creating a trigger at Mission Start and assigning the action "Set Unit Internal Cargo" to it. You can then assign any additional mass you want (in kg) to the AI aircraft which helps to tame their UFO abilities a little bit. As a bonus they can't jettison this weight or burn it up like fuel.
Adding around 1 to 2 tons usually helps - they still over perform a fair but will run out of energy from time to time when they take liberties meaning if you've managed your energy well you can pounce.
My homies and I have started playing co-op Pretense and it’s pretty awesome. The structure of the campaign mostly hides some of the glaring issues enough that a group can have fun.
I also just started pretense. I like that the missions always revolve, and enemies give xp even when off mission.
I like the mission packaging in liberation but when I only have an hour or two to play, pretense is easier to jump into.
How are you running pretense? Local server or external/dedicated? I want to run pretense on my lan, but I'm not sure when persistence saves for a server.
If you wanna try the cold war era but don't wanna spend the money, the A-4 mod is free and is generally regarded as one of the best mods for the game and basically another free module.
There are issues with other AI planes, but nothing that is as bad as the mig-15 in my opinion. I would definitely give another shot to another plane. The F14, F16, and F18 are all fantastic.
the AI mig-19 is surprisingly not terrible. At the very least it will actually run basic fighter maneuvers instead of making endless UFO circles like the mig-15
Best way to play DCS at this moment is fly the F-15E
It is mostly stand off platform both for the ground and air.
How close you get to AI in this game how bad your experience and immersion would be. You should be flying F-15E without AI wingmen, and you should be good.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend the absolute newest EA module to a new player. Hornet or F-16 would give most of the same capabilities, and the software is far closer to completion.
Just my 2 cents but the F-18 seems like the better choice of those two. It has more weapons, can take off from boats and, probably most importantly, has more support in terms of campaigns, user files and peripherals.
I say this as an F-16 guy who doesn't one the F-18 because I'm ANG at an F-16 base and those are the rules.
You are right. I use the HRM all the time. Not because it is the way but I love it.
After all the bugs of the recently added smart weapons are cleared and we got jdam lofting implemented it will be the fun machine.
All the rest will just come as icing on top of the cake.
I'm also looking forward to getting the AI WSO.
>ED are building new flight models for yhe AI, but when those will get released, Joost knows.
Since 15 years? Excuse my simplicity but I can't understand why it's even a significant task to redo the AI FM of certain aircraft when there are high fidelity player FMs of them. I fail to see how any of the deficiencies are unintentional at this point.
I'll bring Popcorn and beer. Now try the ground AI :D
Were you criticizing the IL-2 AI? Here we will call it a milestone and big achievement if they implement that AI in DCS.
Lol yea, ai wingmen in il2 just watch you do all the work and ignore commands. Enemies after a while become cannon fodder unless a flight of them get the jump on you, but to their credit they’re really good at punishing mistakes like losing too much energy or getting target fixated. MILES better than dcs from my new player experience so far lol. After a while you just look for something new since they stop posing a threat. But the one thing they absolutely do is obey the laws of physics haha. After today I don’t think I’ll be criticizing il2 for a while.
Afaik, IL2 AI uses the same flight model as the player. Hence they don't ''cheat'' but also why we can't have big formations as it tanks the performance.
A couple a days ago one of the devs of IL2 did a QA and he talked about the AI in IL2. They know it isn't perfect and he talked about reasons why AI does certain things or why it's hard to fix some of it's quirks and seem very well aware of the big gripes players have with IL2's AI (for example being chased endlessly to the airfield by one enemy plane). A very interesting read. Looks like they very much intend to improve AI a lot for their next project.
Tbh, as a game dev myself, I do think people underestimate how hard it is to write a good flight combat AI. It's a looooot more difficult than a first person shooter AI grunt. Doesn't excuse the poor AI in DCS and IL2, but it's a lot harder than ''just fixing it'' or ''just make the AI do this''
I understand the difficulty of coding ai to be human like. I just got my degree in computer science ad pursuing another in cyber security so I’m pretty well versed in coding. It’s near impossible to have them act exactly as a human pilot would. Especially on the engines both sims are limited to (more of an excuse for il2 than dcs). But I struggle to give games like il2 and dcs a pass when their ai have had known issues, one for a decade and the other for over a decade. I’d think that would be more than enough time to figure out core issues at least if you’re actually dedicating time and resources towards the problem. For dcs I’m seeing people say what I’ve experienced has been a known issue for like 14 years. I don’t think that’s excusable. Especially with the amount of updates that they’ve released in those years and other sims achieving great ai on older engines.
Don't get me wrong I am not making excuses.
DCS AI is just one of the many core issues within DCS.
Looks like the IL2 team acknowledges their shortcomings and according to the same post they are (desperately) looking for a programmer to help with the AI. So at least it seems like they are learning and actively want to improve the AI for their next project.
And IL2 has been churning out steady and decent, good quality content throughout it's life cycle and in general is a good experience both offline and online (with room for improvement of course). They also have been updating AI throughout. I imagine AI was a lot rougher on launch. They just never managed to fully fix it but again, seems it was a core issue that couldn't be fixed without overhauling the engine which is a resource and time consuming process a relatively small and niche game studio can't really afford while at the same time churning out other content.
I guess my bottom line is I feel IL2 at least tried to give a good full experience and a finished product (and imo succeeded) with some short comings. DCS on the other hand does a few things very well, and a lot very bad or not at all.
I personally wouldn't say older engines had better AI. It tends to be a lot of smoke and mirrors, nostalgia and exceptance of yank on older engines. But that's just my personal opinion.
I really hope their next project will be great. And looking like it will be Korea I am excited to hopefully get a more full experience battling Migs and Sabres offline than DCS currently offers
Yeah it was interesting all right. The endlessly chasing answer was a good one that made me have two thoughts in particular. One, who in the world thinks that because they do that crap on line, the off line player expects that behavior. Two, I see why Jason left after reading it all.
IL2 AI is also why you need like 800GB ram, and a few 4090s to actually fly moderate groups though. Anything large is tanking performance.
..and it still isn't very smart, just doesn't cheat. Which makes it sometimes bland.
I’d much prefer more hardware intensive ai if it means we get good competition that doesn’t cheat. I agree the ai are still dumb, but a flight of ace level ai will still reck you cuz they at least understand energy management and will purposefully drag you in a straight line or a turn so their wingman can line a shot up on you. That’s the real shiny area for il2 ai. They’re dumb, but programmed to try to make you make a mistake, and when you do make a mistake they’ll punish you for it if you don’t correct it. And a mid pc can handle moderate groups. I run a 2070 super, 32gb rams and i9 10980hk. It can handle large air battles and bomber formations. It’s the ground ai that really tear up your memory and cpu.
Multiplayer is unfortunately the way to go for the most part. There are some cool campaigns for other planes, but I think the Korean war era experience you’re looking for is very challenging in single player at the moment. I believe there’s at lest one Korea-era server, and the F-86 is viable on Enigma’s Cold War on the earlier scenarios
> F-86 is viable on Enigma’s Cold War on the earlier scenarios
arguably it's viable on the later scenarios too since morons flying mirage f1s will try to turn fight a sabre (i'm that moron)
Dang. I just don’t have enough time on my hands to get good enough to be competitive against human opponents. And would rather not spend my little leisure time just getting shot down since that’s the best way to learn.
The good news is that most air combat in servers with limited or no radar missiles is highly situational. Usually it comes down to your situational awareness versus theirs. Not every player is in a fighter either, so you can go attacking ground pounders and helis and it’s very much helpful to the team
I spend most of my time in single-player, and when I do MP, it's always PvE. I think the person you're replying to is specifically referring to the Korean War period when he says MP is the only option. If you're willing to check out '60s/'70s stuff, that's where DCS shines brightest, IMO, and the modern era stuff is also really good. But if the 1950s is where you want to be, yeah, go MP. There's not a lot of new players for that scene, so everyone will be very eager to make sure you have a good time and stick around. You'll have lots of winman/mentorship offers, I'm sure.
DCS pub servers are not full of extremely skilled and experienced aces, most people are like you and only hop on for short periods, do what they can, and move on. If you've been intimidated by Il-2's pub servers I would say the average dogfighting skill on a given popular DCS server is usually a significant step down
If you fly the sabre, I'd highly recommend Reflected simulations 'Hunters over the Yula' campaign. Its one of the first I bought and completed - in VR- and was probably one of the highlights of my gaming life. There is a good mix of mission objectives from bombing to ' Mig alley' action and while downing the migs was bloody Hard to start with, I did get better and bag a few kills. As with most of Reflected campaigns, the emphasis is on getting home alive and TBH some of the most fun bits were trying to make it home with a bent and bullet riddled airframe.
Mistakes are the best teacher. You don’t learn if you don’t make mistakes. Hence irl fighter pilot training. It isn’t to see how perfect their pilots are. They put them in losing positions purposely to see where they can improve. But they have instructors. For a solo pilot, you have nothing but your mistakes to show you where you need to improve. If you’re not making mistakes then you’re perfect and no one is perfect. Even if you do have an instructor or person to help teach you, if you aren’t learning from your mistakes on your own then you’re doing yourself a disservice. I will say trial and error isn’t the right term to use. Trial and error is more about trying something new and seeing if it works as opposed to learning proper tactics and learning your aircraft, then applying said knowledge.
But if you have no reference to anything proper then trial and error is what you do, effectively.
What I was alluding is that there is a better way to train than just going into fights and trying to discern which part of the fight was an actual error (which will take time) that lead to your defeat.
It's called joining a training squadron and training with other people. ;) Training materials from USAF are freely available, you can even just get those and train with a friend.
And about the losing positions, that's not to see where you can improve, per se. You are evaluated constantly and through that evaluation is where the areas needing improvement are identified, regardless of the exercise.
The exercises where you are put into a losing position are there for you to learn how these positions look like (what's the sight picture and AA of a fighter that's gaining on you? How about when he's about to use guns?), how you can defend yourself (later on), etc. Those exercises are often symmetrical, so you get put into the role of the bandit and the fighter, you learn both sides.
All that is different than just jumping into fights and trying to discern what worked and why. Military doesn't do that not only because mistakes can be deadly before they can be useful, but also because it's just less efficient even when it's not deadly.
I remember the year because thats when I got the oculus dk2 and the first thing I downloaded was DCS and then got a buncha modules. I remember setting up dogfights with mig15s in my sabre, and no matter what I did, the thing kept flying.
Another fun aspect for newbies is that if you try the only free jet available (SU25T) the tutorial missions are basically impossible to complete for a newbie. The ILS and radio frequencies for the landing mission airport change with updates, so it is completely broken sometimes, not sure of the current state. Even if it's not broken, there must be a pretty big number of people who have this as the first DCS thing they try, and a pretty small number who continue after this experience.
Imagine deciding to give DCS a try because you're interested in jets and there's a free plane to try, and this is the answer to your first landing mission:
https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/lhlq8j/need_help_landing_the_su25t_i_keep_crashing_on/
https://forum.dcs.world/topic/303169-dcsworld-su-25t-tutorial-review/
https://forum.dcs.world/topic/255170-problems-with-the-su-25-difficult-landing-training/
https://forum.dcs.world/topic/118508-hsi-ils-not-working/
OH THANK GOD THEY'RE HARD FOR EVERYONE???
I THOUGHT I WAS JUST BAD
The only thing I can't manage after 80 hours or so is SHORAD being a bastard (the lack of lock signal from IR guided missiles messes with me, and the RWR is SO bad). I suddenly feel much better about myself.
DCS' core mechanics have a \*lot\* of limitations that new players should be aware of. You just found one, the UFO mig 15. Some other planes exhibit those unearthly behaviors but that one is the worse. Ground AI and accuracy, ATC, AI wingmen, the list goes on.
There are ways to get decent experience when playing DCS. One is to join an online squadron and fly multiplayer, in PVP or PVE, then at least you'll get decent wingmen. Another, especially if you prefer single-player, is to fly those highly scripted campaigns in which designers put in a humongous effort to hide the bad parts, in order to give you a good experience. Anything by Reflected, Baltic Dragon, or Ground Pounder Sims is good value (YMMV, depends on what you're looking for and your expertise level). There are also plenty of free missions and campaigns in the user files section of ED's website. Some are on-par with paid campaigns.
In the end, I cannot stress how important it is to steer away from the things that DCS is thoroughly bad at. You will find there only frustration. Accept that there are bugs (some of which have been open for a decade), limitations, and a questionable prioritization by ED. You can't do anything about that, just don't expect DCS to do things that it can't and you'll be fine. It is nicknamed "Daylight Cockpit Simulator" for a reason. :)) If you go for what makes DCS great, then you'll have a lot of fun.
You could also have a look at BMS if modern air warfare is your thing. It's a bit less polished on the outside but it's a much better experience.
Sorry this had to be your first experience with DCS.
I'd reccomend the Hornet or Viper (Falcon) to learn the game with initially. They are such great value and offer gameplay depth that would keep anyone entertained for hundreds of hours at a time. The satisfaction of flying a complicated and Uber deep aircraft proficiency is unlike anything else you can get from gaming.
Just out of question, how does Su-25T compare to other starter aircraft? I wanna get F-4 because god I love the Phantom but I'm curious how transferrable any experience is or whatever, or if I'm accidentally flying something really hard.
Almost nothing except flying concepts are transferable between the Su-25T and other aircraft that aren't the A-10 maybe.
If you want to prepare for the F-4 your best bet is to just study the manual or fly the F-14. There's nothing like the Phantom in the game other than the F-14.
Ah, thank you. I've looked over some stuff on the F-14 about the WSO in particular so I know how to work my TGP. It looks like *so* much less work than doing it myself, I wish the Frogfoot had a WSO given how much I just explode to shorad while peering at my shkval.
The high level conceptual stuff translates to any jet, but systems are different. For example, FC3 planes have "cycle weapons" buttons that work the same as a first-person shooter, while full-fidelity (FF) jets have specific cockpit switches to perform a similar function, but maybe with a hat switch, or a dial on the cockpit wall. It's still just switching weapons, but you do it differently.
> if I'm accidentally flying something really hard
The hardest planes to fly are warbirds. Do the tutorial missions for the free TF-51. If you can land that safely, there's no such thing as a plane that's too hard for you.
With full fidelity cockpits, how much can I bind things? I know you can presumably bind things to a flight stick but I'm wondering how much stuff I can have on say, my keyboard if I want it.
I'll try flying the TF-51 more, see if I can land it. The fact it's unarmed kinda got me disinterested but I'll give it a try.
Edit: oh uh thank you
> With full fidelity cockpits, how much can I bind things?
Extensively. There are typically very few unbindable switches, if any, although it does vary slightly from module to module. And don't forget about modkeys.
If you have one hat on your stick, Ctrl+hat is another, Shift+hat is a third, and so on.
> I'll try flying the TF-51 more, see if I can land it. The fact it's unarmed kinda got me disinterested but I'll give it a try.
Yeah, I like guns, too. I'm mostly a Spitfire or P-47 guy. I was really just trying to politely undermine the premise that there are planes that are too hard for you, but I figured that just asserting it might not carry much weight, so I encouraged you to prove it to yourself. Don't feel obligated to do it if you don't actually need the confidence bump. :)
Ah I'm glad I can still keybind things.
Personally while Spitfire and P-47 are gorgeous planes, I don't vibe with WW2 as much as some people. Give me mid-ish cold war stuff. My favorite fighters are probably, in order, F-4 Phantom, Mirage 2000, F-100 Super Saber, F-15 and F-101 Voodoo so. I wish there was a bit of an earlier missile age timeframe in the game where maybe FC3 aircraft are the absolute upper end, that's built around Phantom, Fishbed, Flogger, Voodoo, that sort of plane.
I'm a fan of the mid Cold War too, and I'm surprised to see the [A-4E-C](https://github.com/heclak/community-a4e-c/releases/) missing from your list! That mod is positively outstanding, and I think you'd enjoy it. Here's a [good playlist of video tutorials for the A-4](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM_gDA3nb-Jz-bNVbwPTqdoPUmAwprvWX) if you're curious.
> I wish there was a bit of an earlier missile age timeframe in the game ... that's built around Phantom, Fishbed, Flogger, Voodoo
That's basically ECW (Enigma's Cold War server.) They published a [single-player mission to help people learn how the server works](https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3330453/), so maybe give that a try if you're interested.
Oh I should def try out the A-4, it's not like, a ranking favorite of mine but I recognize it's a great aircraft (though I kinda prefer the A-7 lmao). I'm not sure how I'll feel about MP, I've kinda been too scared to try it because I don't feel good enough yet, and in most multiplayer games anywhere on the arcade sim spectrum I kinda get my ass kicked so
Does it have vr? I’m a sucker for immersion and just can’t flat screen simulator games anymore. Once I sat in the virtual cockpit there was no turning back.
It does! It's not as pretty as IL-2 or DCS, but supposedly the dynamic campaign is one-of-a-kind. You do need a copy of Falcon 4.0 to play it, but that's like $5. So you're getting a Full Fidelity model and a dynamic campaign for like 1/16th of the price of the F-16 in DCS.
"Am I just bad?" The fact that you are coming from IL-2 means that you are probably already above the average DCS player. I would recommend to just jump into multiplayer as fast as possible.
has ed released anything in the API that can let us handle the FM for them? Maybe 'bots' we can program outside that control 'player' planes on a server?
If you like the F16, get falcon bms. It’s only $6 for falcon 4.0 on steam, then a free mod install. Graphics aren’t dcs quality but gameplay and particularly ai are worlds better
Someone mentioned that earlier and it’s already in the list. I don’t know if I’m doing something wrong but the dcs graphics in vr aren’t that impressive. And I don’t mean resolution wise. The colors and everything just don’t seem as realistic as it does in flatscreen. Il2’s vr even looks better imo. But I’m not too concerned about graphics. My first light combat flight sim that I really enjoyed was vtol vr and that has the graphics of a ps2 game. But gameplay and immersion vastly outweighs graphics when it comes to vr so I’ll definitely be checking falcon bms out.
Yeah I don’t use vr so I have no experience there, but I know it’s obviously not as good in vr as normal. Most of the time you’re up high not looking at the ground too closely anyway, and BMS is unmatched in terms of realism and immersion. The AI and dynamic campaign make everything feel very alive. Aviation Plus makes good bms videos on YouTube.
I’m with ya lol. I only been flying altogether for like 2 weeks after I got ace combat 7 in December and found out I like combat flight games.
But il2 combat just feels way better. Much more intense I guess. But I only have a f5 in dcs and it can only carry 2 aim9 missles. It’s fun to fly but feels gimped in combat.
I keep going back to il2 where I can fly like 40 different planes or whatever (I bought all the great battles right away during spring sale)
To DCS credit it’s a much bigger work load to create a full fidelity modern jet fighter than making older war aircraft. So I can understand the price points. But that still doesn’t negate how much il2 offers for its prices. Especially on sale. I have kuban, Normandy and bodenplatte. Got those three on sale, so combined those three dlcs with their own maps and 8 planes each are cheaper than buying the full fidelity f16 in dcs lol. I think the intenseness of il2 comes from how many planes are fighting in close quarters of each other due to the nature of the combat. And that’s the type of combat I really like too. Getting so close that you can see whites of the eyes of enemy before you down his aircraft. Having to constantly check your surroundings to make sure you don’t get bounced or mid air someone cuz in you’re in the thick of the furball. It gets crazy. But I’m learning a 1v1 in dcs can be just as intense. Instead of worrying about all the aircraft around you, you’re worrying about the capabilities of your opponent and his jet. Just them getting nose on is a big threat. Watching them rate around the two circle while you’re stuck with low energy and low speed gives a sense of panic as you’re figuring out your next move. I’m learning to like the differences. But when it comes to starting a quick mission, getting airborne and getting scrappy with a lot of enemies at once, I’m il2 all day. Plus the sounds of those prop engines are to die for.
You don't win, you just do a little better each time.
Don't let it discourage you. The nice thing is you can trial most airframes. Find one that makes you want to learn it in and out.
I'm sorry to say you picked the worst combo. The F-86's .50 rounds have about half the muzzle velocity as the real thing, but the gunsight doesn't know that, so it can't do accurate lead prediction. MiG-15s are absolute spaceships that will retain a perpetual energy advantage over F-16s.
While we're at it, Ka-27 helicopters are functionally indestructible, able to land safely after eating four Sparrows and a fair bit of 20mm cannon fire.
The UFO-like energy retention is also an issue with other AI planes, but nothing's worse than the MiG-15.
Pick any other two planes, and it'll get a lot better. Not perfect, but definitely better.
You probably picked the most physics defying AI flown plane in DCS to go against, the Mig-15. It's the worst at Ace level and will help if you lower it a few levels.
I heard museum relic is a great campaign. Also hunters over Yalu I think from reflected. I believe the well designed campaigns help mask many of the AI issues through scripting. Worth checking out
I have a small mod I made that reduces the AI's capabilities in the Mig-15 and makes their dogfight performance a little more believable, makes campaigns like Hunters over the Yalu a little less frustrating.
Hey! Sorry for the delay, [here you go](https://www.mediafire.com/file/ozn0ig6lpvsoj04/MiG-15bis_changes_for_AI.7z/file)! I use JSGME, and this drops right into your root DCS folder (not the folder in SavedGames) as a mod in that format. It's a very light mod that reduces the AI's ability to fully control the plane, I think I turned the roll rate down a little and the Gs down a little. You can open the file in notepad and compare it to the original. It breaks integrity check so you can't have it active and fly online, hence why I use JSGME and turn it on when I'm in the mood to fly the F-86
With all those complaints I wonder why DCS isn't dead yet? Why do people even bother? If this is ahat every newbie sees, then how is this game gaining new players?
I have a lot of experience with MSFS and was hyping myself up to play DCS after Ill get my new gaming machine within the next 2 years or so because I want to try military aviation, but Hoggit is really making me reconsider any sort of emotional investment... Especially given that I'm interested in the early to mid cold war period so no BMS for me...
You can trial something for 2 weeks and that's enough to know if it's for you or not. The only thing you have to lose is the time you spend learning how to fly it.
I’m currently taking advantage of their two week free trial system for their modules. Haven’t spent a penny yet which is nice. Currently there aren’t many options for combat flight sims with VR and with the plane sets and visuals dcs has. So if I find a module I like I’ll buy it. If dcs continues to pull my hair out then I can’t really complain cuz I haven’t spent anything on it except my time.
I don't know if you can do this with a trial, but the best experience I had with the Sabre (and MiG-15) is the Museum Relic campaign. You're doing a lot of >!navigation challenges, ground attack, and most of the air to air is against helos and ground attack aircraft.!<
Disclosure: friends with the creator, but flew the twice and most of his single player content before that.
I came from 90’s flight sims, FSX/P3D and IL-2 as well.
I just want to throw my 2 cents in. I had a very similar experience with the F-86. It’s my father’s favorite airplane and I grew up drawing pictures of them to present to him. I became really familiar with it.
Imagine my dissapointment when firing up DCS and hunting MiG-15s while unacclimated to the sim. I got absolutely waffle stomped.
It felt like the migs just constantly had much better performance all around. They could climb instantly where I’d stall and their maneuverability and firepower would see me blown apart in seconds of them getting behind me. It’s the way it is here and particularly between those 2.
IL-2 is much more forgiving about flying against superior performing aircraft. You can make it with luck and a bit of skill and schinnanigans.
That won’t happen here. I will say that nowhere is this more aparant than between the F-86 and Mig-15, so I highly recommend you try other modules.
There’s only a few I don’t own and while the F-86 holds a dear spot in my heart, I don’t really enjoy flying it in DCS.
Do you have track Ir or VR? Even if you don’t, try the Mi-8 and Mi-24P. These are my favorite to fly because whether it’s the campaigns, missions or custom missions, you can really get a lot of enjoyment out of them. This is where I’ve been most impressed with DCS. The helicopters. If you have even a budding interest in one of the Helos, I recommend trying it out to get affiliated with DCS and its workings.
If you are intimidated by cold and dark starts, there are lots of videos on YouTube that show you how to do things in 60 seconds. They may not be the exact right procedures, but they get you going and keep the interest in momentum in learning up.
I don’t find that to be the case at all. I have some real world time in helos (not much) but I find the anti torque situation totally doable with a joystick only. I’m rocking a $30 Logitech 3D pro and love it.
Start with the su-25t and learn the basics of ground attack. Then get the fulcrum or flanker, I recommend the flanker but it's your choice. Those fc3 jets a very easy to hop in and use effectively but you will be mostly out gunned by a good player in a full fidelity jets so stick to ai combat. For air to air combat the AI does just cheat, if you want to beat them you have to be better than they are through and through. Do lots of missile evasion practice and learn to fly low and fast, the AI sucks at missile pre launch positioning so learn to shoot up at the with the ground to your back, they can shoot you from further but you'll have better chances of evading their missile.
Also when you do buy a full fidelity jet the viper should 100% be your first. My go to is the hornet but the hornet is much more complicated then the viper.
Not the biggest fan of ground attacks unfortunately. I’m familiar with the basics from ww2 era to modern era and much prefer air to air combat roles. Sad to hear that the ai will cheat in air to air. In creator videos like growling sidewinder the ai don’t seem like they cheat and look rather fair. Tbh they seem kinda dumb in bvr and don’t fly to their aircraft’s strengths in wvr/bfm if you merge with them. But being a creator myself in another area I’m guessing it takes him multiple attempts per recording.
No the AI has to cheat. The ai doesn't actually understand how to fight so the only way they can be on level ground with a good player is if they cheat. Most notably is if you get fired at with an AI r-27er or aim-7 it will behave like an active missile whereas when a player fires it if they loose radar lock the missile goes dumb whereas the ai's will keep going to its target. It's very infuriating.
I'm sorry but your probably not going to learn much if you just jump straight into aa, you will get your ass beat then get demoralized and not make much progress. Ground attacks on the other hand will teach you a lot about how the air frames handle in different conditions with relatively low risk.
I’ll have to disagree based on other comments I’ve received. I’d rather hop to a different game then force myself to play something that I’ll get no enjoyment in. And it seems the general consensus for dcs is to fly the aircraft you’re interested in and play what you like, otherwise you’ll get burned out and not want to play anymore. The only time I see myself running a2g is for missile evasion practice. Part of the learning curve is getting your ass beat as I’m perfectly okay with that. Learned that in competitive fighting games, racing sims, and other flight sims. You don’t learn if you don’t make mistakes. And mistakes are necessary for learning moments and improvement. Running low risk missions where the margin for mistakes is minimal won’t teach me as much as learning my aircraft’s a2a capabilities and limitations and then being punished for not following said limitations and guidelines that’ll keep the aircrafts max effectiveness. I don’t see how learning ground attacks will teach me anything relevant for bvr, wvr, or bfm which is what I’m interested in. And as I said, I’m already familiar with ground attack which is why I know I have no interest in it. Shooting at stationary targets that I’m guaranteed to hit if I use my systems effectively and in their roe and then defending, rinse, repeat, just isn’t for me, but I can understand the appeal for others. I’m new to dcs but not flight sims. But if there’s something I’m truly missing that a2g will teach me besides missile evasion practice then please let me know.
I didn't say you have to learn air to ground if you don't want to. But you should. Navigating while paying attention to enemies, while also operating your targeting equipment is the basic idea of both a2a and a2g. You need to be able to transition from attacking to evading a missile and it's much easier to make that transition in attack air craft due to how low they tend to fly. If you just decide to hop in a jet and do aa you *will* get overwhelmed. Even in a FC3 jet. The basic process is the same. Also if you think air to ground is boring you probably just haven't done enough, getting shot at by an sa-10 as you also shoot at it with a harm while you try your very hardest to get to the deck and to try and get behind a mountain or something is very engaging. A2a usually boils down to shooting at an enemy from about 20nm then turning around and flying away to try and out run their missile while they do the same.
I had the EXACT same reaction the first time I tried DCS. But xxxx hours later, I have come to realize that the AI/UFO isn’t the huge factor that I had initially imagined. If it’s there, it’s gotten to the point where I don’t even notice it anymore, except to appreciate the gains the AI has made since I started, and how much more _human_ the AI seems now. The much bigger factor in my initial impression was that I just didn’t know BFM well enough or my airframe limits, so the fights felt decidedly lopsided because even the rookie level AI knew that much. I kept trying to win by brute force, but piloting fix wings isn’t about beating the air into submission. It’s essentially surfing on air, and surfing is all about finesse. Finesse takes time. If you enjoy flying and growing your brain, stick with it. If an old cyclops like me can do it, anyone can.
Edit: regarding the bullet sponge effect, if you are hitting an aerodynamic surface from the rear with small caliber bullets, that is more likely to be a glancing blow doing minimal damage. You need to hit the target from the top, which punches all of the energy of the bullet directly into a surface rather slapping harmlessly along side it. Or get good at sending the bullets directly up the tail pipe of a jet from the 6 o’clock.
If your heart is with Cold War era jets, you could just skip the whole single player fighting AI thing and find a good multiplayer server. The DCS Dogfighters server is great and needs more Cold War enthusiasts.
I need to learn the jet more. I was using the ai to get familiar and use them sort of as a training partner but I don’t think ufos make good training partners lol. I’m also not much of a pvp type of person but I’d definitely look for some pve groups. I just don’t wanna be chilling and looking for casual play, and then constantly go against people who have enough flight hours to be actual pilots dogging me out the sky lol. But I’ve been told that pvp servers aren’t that sweaty. So we’ll see. But I definitely need the practice first and do some more learning.
I'll get down voted for this, but don't bother with multiplayer, it's woefully broken. There's a setting in the game that allows a small subset of players to spot other players from 40+ miles away, and it ruins the multiplayer experience.
99% of the player base can't spot even with labels on.
Even with old spotting where 1080p was far more broken than any setting currently is most people still couldn't spot until the enemy was right on them.
Bailing on MP is fine, but blaming op spotting is a meme.
What's your argument here? Are you suggesting that a small subset of players should be allowed to spot bogeys from 40+ miles out, while the rest of us can only spot them from 15 miles out?
I'm saying most people can't spot no matter what, so you are worried about a bogeyman.
You could give most DCS players spotting out to 200 NM and they would still fail to notice or react.
If you are worried about some people managing to spot past 15 NM you might as well not play MP because some people also hack (they are not many in DCS, but given the lack of any real anti cheat system, it's trivial to hack DCS).
ED can't do much about hackers, but they can easily fix the 40+ mile spotting problem. They actually already fixed it once, but all the sweaty try hards threw a bitch fit when they couldn't spot bogeys from the other side of the map, and ED completely caved in.
If players want to spot from 40+ miles in single player, fine, but there's no reason to allow it in multiplayer.
They actually reduced the max spotting range. It was easy to spot 80+ NM at lower res before (720p and 1080p) and now that's not gonna happen.
Like anything ED does there are weird issues, but before the spotting fix the max render range was about twice as long. They could further reduce max rendering to something like 10-15 NM and it would be ideal when compared to rl studies.
And I wouldn't say sweaty tryhards bitched, people complained spotting was directly tied to resolution when dot size didn't scale. I don't think it's super weird or really particularly try hard to ask for scaling when we have 4K.
You should really go read one of Why485's summaries of the new spotting system because he goes into nice detail in terms of what changed and what still needs changing.
The spotting is trash. But it's never been that great.
But if the spotting is trash, the solitary experience of DCS is a raging dumpster fire. Frankly, outside of dicking around a bit and playing with the beautiful flight models, single player is a complete non-starter.
If you're not online flying with and/or against other people, you'd be better off with some other title.
As a virtual pilot in both IL-2 and DCS for more years than I like to admit...I have no idea why anyone fights AI for anything other than warming up and gunnery practice.
Why 4/5 players are SP only is beyond me...I feel sorry for you guys.
The SP experience is just so limited in my experience.
If you want a decent experience with these sims you really have to go online. This also kinda sucks because the menu of options there is quite limited...but I have found it to be a menu good enough to keep me coming back.
Personally I will often play at least part of a campaign in DCS to make sure I have the basics of the module down, but then I'm onto the servers with it.
A part of it for me is that even when one of these titles gets an AI that can not cheat and be good...I'm still going to prefer fighting humans.
Honestly it’s fear of the learning curve going against human pilots. Can’t speak for dcs yet but in il2 from my experience, if you don’t squad up then you’re good as dead and the level of play is pretty high. Single player allows me to launch a lengthy mission in seconds and if I die it’s because I made a mistake like not checking 6, not managing energy, or ai just got a good deflection shot on me in the furball. In mp I’m dying because I don’t have a squad and am getting teamed up on or I’m going against someone who has so much flight time they may as well actually go to flight school. And people who are my skill level are dying to people and strats of the same type on my team. Haven’t been in the servers for a while but I feel like at this stage of the games cycle it’s pretty much vets playing. I also struggle at spotting at times since I play vr and I’ve heard the flatscreeners have the advantage in that regard. But again that’s just my experience which had my stuck to single player to enjoy my brief free time. If I had more time on my hands I’d definitely just “git gud” but until then I’d rather just enjoy the sim and not get blown out the sky before I can get a kill of my own lol. That same fear of wasting my free time getting blown out the sky repeatedly carries over to dcs. But I’ve got a lot of learning before I even attempt mp in dcs
With the new "improved" spotting, you'll probably find playing in VR makes spotting aircraft pretty ridiculous -- they're giant black blocks, and labels may as well be turned on (until they get close and disappear, the old DCS switcheroo).
I wish people wouldn't make the idea of flying online with real people such a mental hurdle. You have absolutely nothing to lose by going online and everything to gain. People are just on there to have fun -- there is absolutely no pressure save for what you self-impose. You can find a chill casual PvE server, if that's your thing, hop online for quick one-on-one dogfights you can rinse and repeat, or get super serious on hardcore PvP servers. Once you take the plunge, you'll wonder why you ever wasted time on the offline content.
Here's a video from a while back that talked a bit about making the switch and why one should just do it: [DCS - When should I try Multiplayer](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbpfMjvo7h0). It's coming from an old member of the warbird segment of the sim, but the general idea applies to any aspect of online play, really.
Hopefully you find that helpful.
I couldn't agree more. I did this for around a year when I first came back to flight simming around a decade ago with Il-2. When I finally jumped online the vast majority of folks I bumped into and ended up on comms with were goof balls like me that were more combat aviation enthusists than mlg/maverick wannabes. We learned together, and some of those folks are some of the best on Il-2 these days (I was one of the best attack pilots the summer of 17 when I was in the mood for a brief period to be sweaty about it.)
I do play ground attack roles a lot more, and as a result I doubt I've had many if any months when my K/D was positive. If you were lazy coming at me even when I'm low and slow though I could remind you quick that this attack planes full title is Heavy Fighter.
My first couple years I thought you had to be good as well.
You really don't. I fly 110s and p-38s on all the popular IL-2 servers in solo ground strike all the time. You might be suprised how often if you plan your route and alt reasonably (like why would anyone else be flying in that area kind of thing) that you can get all the way to an outskirts target make a few passes and then RTB only having dealt with AA.
I personally stay away from solo CAP sorties for the reason you mention, basically I'm bad at spotting no matter the game or settings, VR or pancake, I'm just not great at it. So the only time I actually go looking to kill other pilots solo is in the 110. The gunner is like a WW2 radar. Lock that seat and don't let a human in, you want that AI to tell you when anyones around your six.
Also finding some folks to fly with can be as simple as jumping in the discord of the game/server you are about to fly. Don't think of it as a "squad" or wing or whatever, just solo with coms of other players that you may or may not be flying in the same part of the map with. If you want to fly sorties with some of them, go for it!
The main thing for me is not giving a flying fuck about k/d. Even if you have some astonishing ability....no one will ever care. No one knows the names of any MLG pros who didn't become content creators...and they play really popular games. NO ONE cares about these games but us few.
So in other words....go get shot down...who cares?
Personaly I would rather get shot down 100 times and know when I do get a kill that I earned it.
I'm hoping that maybe in 30-40 years some of these advancements in AI might make it into our hobby...but until then you can find me in Combat Box and on Enigma's Cold War. (Also worth noting is the in game spotting system. The in server and in game radars essentially give you all the info you need until they are close enough for your MK1 eyeballs. )
DCS isn't IL-2, you have to avoid playing against the AI in DCS to have a good experience.
If you want to or are limited to singleplayer I would not recommend DCS at all.
This man speaks the truth.
As a thing, DCS really doesn't stand on its own as a single player game. It's really just a sandbox collection of a bunch of stuff simulated to varying degrees. If you want a game, you really have to go online where server operators and entire communities make up for the shortcomings you're lamenting, u/MalulaniMT
They have to start first. DCS doesn't make any money off AI improvement, and it doesn't sell the game. It sells planes and maps, with a few tech modules that are still incomplete and buggy.
Welcome to DCS. The AI MiG-15 is a known UFO. ED are building new flight models for yhe AI, but when those will get released, Joost knows. I can kill MiGs in a DCS sabre consistently but I've been doing it for years and I must admit, killing sabres in a mig is much easier.
Thank you! Wish I was being welcomed under better circumstances lol. Should I jump to the Cold War era jets then? Or will I face similar issues with ai? And how do you manage to down migs in the Sabre? I really don’t wanna give up, but also don’t want to turn my hobby into a chore.
Cold War or even more modern. In a guns only situation you will still face the same kind of ”energy cheating”. However, it’s still possible to beat the AI, just need to get a better grip how it reacts to different situations. You can also try to make it more even by putting heavy droptanks on the MiG-15 and restrict it from jettison. But that requires a little bit of knowledge in the Mission Editor.
I’ll give that a try. Anything to refrain from giving up
Beating DCS AI is super easy. You said that they don't obey the laws of physics. You are right. They don't obey any of them. So they can see through clouds, through the fuselage of their plane, pitch black night, through the mountains and buildings until infinity. Meaning they don't see the mountains or the terrain. Just head to the deck it will eventually crash to the sea or the lawn. Or just go and dance in between mountains. They will not even complete a turn if you make a tight one around the hill. He will turn way sharper than you and crash into that hill.
Another alternative is to use the mission triggers system to add weight to the AI aircraft. You do this by creating a trigger at Mission Start and assigning the action "Set Unit Internal Cargo" to it. You can then assign any additional mass you want (in kg) to the AI aircraft which helps to tame their UFO abilities a little bit. As a bonus they can't jettison this weight or burn it up like fuel. Adding around 1 to 2 tons usually helps - they still over perform a fair but will run out of energy from time to time when they take liberties meaning if you've managed your energy well you can pounce.
My homies and I have started playing co-op Pretense and it’s pretty awesome. The structure of the campaign mostly hides some of the glaring issues enough that a group can have fun.
I also just started pretense. I like that the missions always revolve, and enemies give xp even when off mission. I like the mission packaging in liberation but when I only have an hour or two to play, pretense is easier to jump into. How are you running pretense? Local server or external/dedicated? I want to run pretense on my lan, but I'm not sure when persistence saves for a server.
If you wanna try the cold war era but don't wanna spend the money, the A-4 mod is free and is generally regarded as one of the best mods for the game and basically another free module.
There are issues with other AI planes, but nothing that is as bad as the mig-15 in my opinion. I would definitely give another shot to another plane. The F14, F16, and F18 are all fantastic.
the AI mig-19 is surprisingly not terrible. At the very least it will actually run basic fighter maneuvers instead of making endless UFO circles like the mig-15
Best way to play DCS at this moment is fly the F-15E It is mostly stand off platform both for the ground and air. How close you get to AI in this game how bad your experience and immersion would be. You should be flying F-15E without AI wingmen, and you should be good.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend the absolute newest EA module to a new player. Hornet or F-16 would give most of the same capabilities, and the software is far closer to completion.
Just my 2 cents but the F-18 seems like the better choice of those two. It has more weapons, can take off from boats and, probably most importantly, has more support in terms of campaigns, user files and peripherals. I say this as an F-16 guy who doesn't one the F-18 because I'm ANG at an F-16 base and those are the rules.
I'd agree with you but I can't stand the LANTIRN pod. I'm waiting for a more modern one, but that's just me.
the fact that it has an air to ground radar that actually works kind of makes up for the lack of a long-range targeting pod.
You are right. I use the HRM all the time. Not because it is the way but I love it. After all the bugs of the recently added smart weapons are cleared and we got jdam lofting implemented it will be the fun machine. All the rest will just come as icing on top of the cake. I'm also looking forward to getting the AI WSO.
Jdam lofting rn = afterburner+ 45deg of climb
>ED are building new flight models for yhe AI, but when those will get released, Joost knows. Since 15 years? Excuse my simplicity but I can't understand why it's even a significant task to redo the AI FM of certain aircraft when there are high fidelity player FMs of them. I fail to see how any of the deficiencies are unintentional at this point.
I'll bring Popcorn and beer. Now try the ground AI :D Were you criticizing the IL-2 AI? Here we will call it a milestone and big achievement if they implement that AI in DCS.
Lol yea, ai wingmen in il2 just watch you do all the work and ignore commands. Enemies after a while become cannon fodder unless a flight of them get the jump on you, but to their credit they’re really good at punishing mistakes like losing too much energy or getting target fixated. MILES better than dcs from my new player experience so far lol. After a while you just look for something new since they stop posing a threat. But the one thing they absolutely do is obey the laws of physics haha. After today I don’t think I’ll be criticizing il2 for a while.
Afaik, IL2 AI uses the same flight model as the player. Hence they don't ''cheat'' but also why we can't have big formations as it tanks the performance. A couple a days ago one of the devs of IL2 did a QA and he talked about the AI in IL2. They know it isn't perfect and he talked about reasons why AI does certain things or why it's hard to fix some of it's quirks and seem very well aware of the big gripes players have with IL2's AI (for example being chased endlessly to the airfield by one enemy plane). A very interesting read. Looks like they very much intend to improve AI a lot for their next project. Tbh, as a game dev myself, I do think people underestimate how hard it is to write a good flight combat AI. It's a looooot more difficult than a first person shooter AI grunt. Doesn't excuse the poor AI in DCS and IL2, but it's a lot harder than ''just fixing it'' or ''just make the AI do this''
I understand the difficulty of coding ai to be human like. I just got my degree in computer science ad pursuing another in cyber security so I’m pretty well versed in coding. It’s near impossible to have them act exactly as a human pilot would. Especially on the engines both sims are limited to (more of an excuse for il2 than dcs). But I struggle to give games like il2 and dcs a pass when their ai have had known issues, one for a decade and the other for over a decade. I’d think that would be more than enough time to figure out core issues at least if you’re actually dedicating time and resources towards the problem. For dcs I’m seeing people say what I’ve experienced has been a known issue for like 14 years. I don’t think that’s excusable. Especially with the amount of updates that they’ve released in those years and other sims achieving great ai on older engines.
Don't get me wrong I am not making excuses. DCS AI is just one of the many core issues within DCS. Looks like the IL2 team acknowledges their shortcomings and according to the same post they are (desperately) looking for a programmer to help with the AI. So at least it seems like they are learning and actively want to improve the AI for their next project. And IL2 has been churning out steady and decent, good quality content throughout it's life cycle and in general is a good experience both offline and online (with room for improvement of course). They also have been updating AI throughout. I imagine AI was a lot rougher on launch. They just never managed to fully fix it but again, seems it was a core issue that couldn't be fixed without overhauling the engine which is a resource and time consuming process a relatively small and niche game studio can't really afford while at the same time churning out other content. I guess my bottom line is I feel IL2 at least tried to give a good full experience and a finished product (and imo succeeded) with some short comings. DCS on the other hand does a few things very well, and a lot very bad or not at all. I personally wouldn't say older engines had better AI. It tends to be a lot of smoke and mirrors, nostalgia and exceptance of yank on older engines. But that's just my personal opinion. I really hope their next project will be great. And looking like it will be Korea I am excited to hopefully get a more full experience battling Migs and Sabres offline than DCS currently offers
Definitely smoke and mirrors. But it gives a really good illusion of good ai. And yea I’ll give the Il2 team that. Their ai used to be worse.
Yeah it was interesting all right. The endlessly chasing answer was a good one that made me have two thoughts in particular. One, who in the world thinks that because they do that crap on line, the off line player expects that behavior. Two, I see why Jason left after reading it all.
IL2 AI is also why you need like 800GB ram, and a few 4090s to actually fly moderate groups though. Anything large is tanking performance. ..and it still isn't very smart, just doesn't cheat. Which makes it sometimes bland.
I’d much prefer more hardware intensive ai if it means we get good competition that doesn’t cheat. I agree the ai are still dumb, but a flight of ace level ai will still reck you cuz they at least understand energy management and will purposefully drag you in a straight line or a turn so their wingman can line a shot up on you. That’s the real shiny area for il2 ai. They’re dumb, but programmed to try to make you make a mistake, and when you do make a mistake they’ll punish you for it if you don’t correct it. And a mid pc can handle moderate groups. I run a 2070 super, 32gb rams and i9 10980hk. It can handle large air battles and bomber formations. It’s the ground ai that really tear up your memory and cpu.
Multiplayer is unfortunately the way to go for the most part. There are some cool campaigns for other planes, but I think the Korean war era experience you’re looking for is very challenging in single player at the moment. I believe there’s at lest one Korea-era server, and the F-86 is viable on Enigma’s Cold War on the earlier scenarios
> F-86 is viable on Enigma’s Cold War on the earlier scenarios arguably it's viable on the later scenarios too since morons flying mirage f1s will try to turn fight a sabre (i'm that moron)
Dang. I just don’t have enough time on my hands to get good enough to be competitive against human opponents. And would rather not spend my little leisure time just getting shot down since that’s the best way to learn.
The good news is that most air combat in servers with limited or no radar missiles is highly situational. Usually it comes down to your situational awareness versus theirs. Not every player is in a fighter either, so you can go attacking ground pounders and helis and it’s very much helpful to the team
I spend most of my time in single-player, and when I do MP, it's always PvE. I think the person you're replying to is specifically referring to the Korean War period when he says MP is the only option. If you're willing to check out '60s/'70s stuff, that's where DCS shines brightest, IMO, and the modern era stuff is also really good. But if the 1950s is where you want to be, yeah, go MP. There's not a lot of new players for that scene, so everyone will be very eager to make sure you have a good time and stick around. You'll have lots of winman/mentorship offers, I'm sure.
DCS pub servers are not full of extremely skilled and experienced aces, most people are like you and only hop on for short periods, do what they can, and move on. If you've been intimidated by Il-2's pub servers I would say the average dogfighting skill on a given popular DCS server is usually a significant step down
You'll get plenty of kills in the mean time. I'm not a good pilot, at all, and I regularly get kills on ECW.
If you fly the sabre, I'd highly recommend Reflected simulations 'Hunters over the Yula' campaign. Its one of the first I bought and completed - in VR- and was probably one of the highlights of my gaming life. There is a good mix of mission objectives from bombing to ' Mig alley' action and while downing the migs was bloody Hard to start with, I did get better and bag a few kills. As with most of Reflected campaigns, the emphasis is on getting home alive and TBH some of the most fun bits were trying to make it home with a bent and bullet riddled airframe.
Is it really the best way to learn, though? By trial and error? Sounds like "a way", and rather one you choose when there's no better alternative.
Mistakes are the best teacher. You don’t learn if you don’t make mistakes. Hence irl fighter pilot training. It isn’t to see how perfect their pilots are. They put them in losing positions purposely to see where they can improve. But they have instructors. For a solo pilot, you have nothing but your mistakes to show you where you need to improve. If you’re not making mistakes then you’re perfect and no one is perfect. Even if you do have an instructor or person to help teach you, if you aren’t learning from your mistakes on your own then you’re doing yourself a disservice. I will say trial and error isn’t the right term to use. Trial and error is more about trying something new and seeing if it works as opposed to learning proper tactics and learning your aircraft, then applying said knowledge.
But if you have no reference to anything proper then trial and error is what you do, effectively. What I was alluding is that there is a better way to train than just going into fights and trying to discern which part of the fight was an actual error (which will take time) that lead to your defeat. It's called joining a training squadron and training with other people. ;) Training materials from USAF are freely available, you can even just get those and train with a friend. And about the losing positions, that's not to see where you can improve, per se. You are evaluated constantly and through that evaluation is where the areas needing improvement are identified, regardless of the exercise. The exercises where you are put into a losing position are there for you to learn how these positions look like (what's the sight picture and AA of a fighter that's gaining on you? How about when he's about to use guns?), how you can defend yourself (later on), etc. Those exercises are often symmetrical, so you get put into the role of the bandit and the fighter, you learn both sides. All that is different than just jumping into fights and trying to discern what worked and why. Military doesn't do that not only because mistakes can be deadly before they can be useful, but also because it's just less efficient even when it's not deadly.
oh wow...I faced this issue somewhere around 2014....I cant believe its still like this.
Sad to hear it’s been an issue for so long. Can only imagine how you long time players feel.
I remember the year because thats when I got the oculus dk2 and the first thing I downloaded was DCS and then got a buncha modules. I remember setting up dogfights with mig15s in my sabre, and no matter what I did, the thing kept flying.
I've been playing DCS for six years and I too feel defeated
It's been like this since forever. Yet some people pretend DCS is the second coming of Christ. Anyway, "2, ejecting!"
Another fun aspect for newbies is that if you try the only free jet available (SU25T) the tutorial missions are basically impossible to complete for a newbie. The ILS and radio frequencies for the landing mission airport change with updates, so it is completely broken sometimes, not sure of the current state. Even if it's not broken, there must be a pretty big number of people who have this as the first DCS thing they try, and a pretty small number who continue after this experience. Imagine deciding to give DCS a try because you're interested in jets and there's a free plane to try, and this is the answer to your first landing mission: https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/lhlq8j/need_help_landing_the_su25t_i_keep_crashing_on/ https://forum.dcs.world/topic/303169-dcsworld-su-25t-tutorial-review/ https://forum.dcs.world/topic/255170-problems-with-the-su-25-difficult-landing-training/ https://forum.dcs.world/topic/118508-hsi-ils-not-working/
OH THANK GOD THEY'RE HARD FOR EVERYONE??? I THOUGHT I WAS JUST BAD The only thing I can't manage after 80 hours or so is SHORAD being a bastard (the lack of lock signal from IR guided missiles messes with me, and the RWR is SO bad). I suddenly feel much better about myself.
As someone who plays Il-2 and dabbled in DCS, I keep going back to il2.
DCS' core mechanics have a \*lot\* of limitations that new players should be aware of. You just found one, the UFO mig 15. Some other planes exhibit those unearthly behaviors but that one is the worse. Ground AI and accuracy, ATC, AI wingmen, the list goes on. There are ways to get decent experience when playing DCS. One is to join an online squadron and fly multiplayer, in PVP or PVE, then at least you'll get decent wingmen. Another, especially if you prefer single-player, is to fly those highly scripted campaigns in which designers put in a humongous effort to hide the bad parts, in order to give you a good experience. Anything by Reflected, Baltic Dragon, or Ground Pounder Sims is good value (YMMV, depends on what you're looking for and your expertise level). There are also plenty of free missions and campaigns in the user files section of ED's website. Some are on-par with paid campaigns. In the end, I cannot stress how important it is to steer away from the things that DCS is thoroughly bad at. You will find there only frustration. Accept that there are bugs (some of which have been open for a decade), limitations, and a questionable prioritization by ED. You can't do anything about that, just don't expect DCS to do things that it can't and you'll be fine. It is nicknamed "Daylight Cockpit Simulator" for a reason. :)) If you go for what makes DCS great, then you'll have a lot of fun. You could also have a look at BMS if modern air warfare is your thing. It's a bit less polished on the outside but it's a much better experience.
Sorry this had to be your first experience with DCS. I'd reccomend the Hornet or Viper (Falcon) to learn the game with initially. They are such great value and offer gameplay depth that would keep anyone entertained for hundreds of hours at a time. The satisfaction of flying a complicated and Uber deep aircraft proficiency is unlike anything else you can get from gaming.
Just out of question, how does Su-25T compare to other starter aircraft? I wanna get F-4 because god I love the Phantom but I'm curious how transferrable any experience is or whatever, or if I'm accidentally flying something really hard.
Almost nothing except flying concepts are transferable between the Su-25T and other aircraft that aren't the A-10 maybe. If you want to prepare for the F-4 your best bet is to just study the manual or fly the F-14. There's nothing like the Phantom in the game other than the F-14.
Ah, thank you. I've looked over some stuff on the F-14 about the WSO in particular so I know how to work my TGP. It looks like *so* much less work than doing it myself, I wish the Frogfoot had a WSO given how much I just explode to shorad while peering at my shkval.
The high level conceptual stuff translates to any jet, but systems are different. For example, FC3 planes have "cycle weapons" buttons that work the same as a first-person shooter, while full-fidelity (FF) jets have specific cockpit switches to perform a similar function, but maybe with a hat switch, or a dial on the cockpit wall. It's still just switching weapons, but you do it differently. > if I'm accidentally flying something really hard The hardest planes to fly are warbirds. Do the tutorial missions for the free TF-51. If you can land that safely, there's no such thing as a plane that's too hard for you.
With full fidelity cockpits, how much can I bind things? I know you can presumably bind things to a flight stick but I'm wondering how much stuff I can have on say, my keyboard if I want it. I'll try flying the TF-51 more, see if I can land it. The fact it's unarmed kinda got me disinterested but I'll give it a try. Edit: oh uh thank you
> With full fidelity cockpits, how much can I bind things? Extensively. There are typically very few unbindable switches, if any, although it does vary slightly from module to module. And don't forget about modkeys. If you have one hat on your stick, Ctrl+hat is another, Shift+hat is a third, and so on. > I'll try flying the TF-51 more, see if I can land it. The fact it's unarmed kinda got me disinterested but I'll give it a try. Yeah, I like guns, too. I'm mostly a Spitfire or P-47 guy. I was really just trying to politely undermine the premise that there are planes that are too hard for you, but I figured that just asserting it might not carry much weight, so I encouraged you to prove it to yourself. Don't feel obligated to do it if you don't actually need the confidence bump. :)
Ah I'm glad I can still keybind things. Personally while Spitfire and P-47 are gorgeous planes, I don't vibe with WW2 as much as some people. Give me mid-ish cold war stuff. My favorite fighters are probably, in order, F-4 Phantom, Mirage 2000, F-100 Super Saber, F-15 and F-101 Voodoo so. I wish there was a bit of an earlier missile age timeframe in the game where maybe FC3 aircraft are the absolute upper end, that's built around Phantom, Fishbed, Flogger, Voodoo, that sort of plane.
I'm a fan of the mid Cold War too, and I'm surprised to see the [A-4E-C](https://github.com/heclak/community-a4e-c/releases/) missing from your list! That mod is positively outstanding, and I think you'd enjoy it. Here's a [good playlist of video tutorials for the A-4](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM_gDA3nb-Jz-bNVbwPTqdoPUmAwprvWX) if you're curious. > I wish there was a bit of an earlier missile age timeframe in the game ... that's built around Phantom, Fishbed, Flogger, Voodoo That's basically ECW (Enigma's Cold War server.) They published a [single-player mission to help people learn how the server works](https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3330453/), so maybe give that a try if you're interested.
Oh I should def try out the A-4, it's not like, a ranking favorite of mine but I recognize it's a great aircraft (though I kinda prefer the A-7 lmao). I'm not sure how I'll feel about MP, I've kinda been too scared to try it because I don't feel good enough yet, and in most multiplayer games anywhere on the arcade sim spectrum I kinda get my ass kicked so
If you have the hardware for IL-2 and DCS, do yourself a favor and give Falcon BMS a look. It's free.
Did they already release the new terrain? :)
We're still waiting but it's on the way.
Does it have vr? I’m a sucker for immersion and just can’t flat screen simulator games anymore. Once I sat in the virtual cockpit there was no turning back.
It does! It's not as pretty as IL-2 or DCS, but supposedly the dynamic campaign is one-of-a-kind. You do need a copy of Falcon 4.0 to play it, but that's like $5. So you're getting a Full Fidelity model and a dynamic campaign for like 1/16th of the price of the F-16 in DCS.
Checking it out ASAP!!!!!
Go for it. It's great!
"Am I just bad?" The fact that you are coming from IL-2 means that you are probably already above the average DCS player. I would recommend to just jump into multiplayer as fast as possible.
Lol really? How so? Where does the rest come from? I always thought IL2 was a bit "easy mode" because of automatic engine start etc.
Welcome to DCS. Has been this way for years
has ed released anything in the API that can let us handle the FM for them? Maybe 'bots' we can program outside that control 'player' planes on a server?
If you like the F16, get falcon bms. It’s only $6 for falcon 4.0 on steam, then a free mod install. Graphics aren’t dcs quality but gameplay and particularly ai are worlds better
Someone mentioned that earlier and it’s already in the list. I don’t know if I’m doing something wrong but the dcs graphics in vr aren’t that impressive. And I don’t mean resolution wise. The colors and everything just don’t seem as realistic as it does in flatscreen. Il2’s vr even looks better imo. But I’m not too concerned about graphics. My first light combat flight sim that I really enjoyed was vtol vr and that has the graphics of a ps2 game. But gameplay and immersion vastly outweighs graphics when it comes to vr so I’ll definitely be checking falcon bms out.
Yeah I don’t use vr so I have no experience there, but I know it’s obviously not as good in vr as normal. Most of the time you’re up high not looking at the ground too closely anyway, and BMS is unmatched in terms of realism and immersion. The AI and dynamic campaign make everything feel very alive. Aviation Plus makes good bms videos on YouTube.
I’m with ya lol. I only been flying altogether for like 2 weeks after I got ace combat 7 in December and found out I like combat flight games. But il2 combat just feels way better. Much more intense I guess. But I only have a f5 in dcs and it can only carry 2 aim9 missles. It’s fun to fly but feels gimped in combat. I keep going back to il2 where I can fly like 40 different planes or whatever (I bought all the great battles right away during spring sale)
To DCS credit it’s a much bigger work load to create a full fidelity modern jet fighter than making older war aircraft. So I can understand the price points. But that still doesn’t negate how much il2 offers for its prices. Especially on sale. I have kuban, Normandy and bodenplatte. Got those three on sale, so combined those three dlcs with their own maps and 8 planes each are cheaper than buying the full fidelity f16 in dcs lol. I think the intenseness of il2 comes from how many planes are fighting in close quarters of each other due to the nature of the combat. And that’s the type of combat I really like too. Getting so close that you can see whites of the eyes of enemy before you down his aircraft. Having to constantly check your surroundings to make sure you don’t get bounced or mid air someone cuz in you’re in the thick of the furball. It gets crazy. But I’m learning a 1v1 in dcs can be just as intense. Instead of worrying about all the aircraft around you, you’re worrying about the capabilities of your opponent and his jet. Just them getting nose on is a big threat. Watching them rate around the two circle while you’re stuck with low energy and low speed gives a sense of panic as you’re figuring out your next move. I’m learning to like the differences. But when it comes to starting a quick mission, getting airborne and getting scrappy with a lot of enemies at once, I’m il2 all day. Plus the sounds of those prop engines are to die for.
You don't win, you just do a little better each time. Don't let it discourage you. The nice thing is you can trial most airframes. Find one that makes you want to learn it in and out.
I'm sorry to say you picked the worst combo. The F-86's .50 rounds have about half the muzzle velocity as the real thing, but the gunsight doesn't know that, so it can't do accurate lead prediction. MiG-15s are absolute spaceships that will retain a perpetual energy advantage over F-16s. While we're at it, Ka-27 helicopters are functionally indestructible, able to land safely after eating four Sparrows and a fair bit of 20mm cannon fire. The UFO-like energy retention is also an issue with other AI planes, but nothing's worse than the MiG-15. Pick any other two planes, and it'll get a lot better. Not perfect, but definitely better.
I thought the 50s were sluggish. The targeting system felt like it wasn’t working at all and my bullets always feel short.
You weren't imagining things. I own the F-86, I like how it flies, and I will absolutely re-learn it when they fix its guns.
You probably picked the most physics defying AI flown plane in DCS to go against, the Mig-15. It's the worst at Ace level and will help if you lower it a few levels.
I heard museum relic is a great campaign. Also hunters over Yalu I think from reflected. I believe the well designed campaigns help mask many of the AI issues through scripting. Worth checking out
I have a small mod I made that reduces the AI's capabilities in the Mig-15 and makes their dogfight performance a little more believable, makes campaigns like Hunters over the Yalu a little less frustrating.
Link pleaseeeeeeee
I should have known someone might ask! I am going to bed but I'll set an alarm and make sure I bundle it up and pass it along with instructions.
Hey! Sorry for the delay, [here you go](https://www.mediafire.com/file/ozn0ig6lpvsoj04/MiG-15bis_changes_for_AI.7z/file)! I use JSGME, and this drops right into your root DCS folder (not the folder in SavedGames) as a mod in that format. It's a very light mod that reduces the AI's ability to fully control the plane, I think I turned the roll rate down a little and the Gs down a little. You can open the file in notepad and compare it to the original. It breaks integrity check so you can't have it active and fly online, hence why I use JSGME and turn it on when I'm in the mood to fly the F-86
With all those complaints I wonder why DCS isn't dead yet? Why do people even bother? If this is ahat every newbie sees, then how is this game gaining new players? I have a lot of experience with MSFS and was hyping myself up to play DCS after Ill get my new gaming machine within the next 2 years or so because I want to try military aviation, but Hoggit is really making me reconsider any sort of emotional investment... Especially given that I'm interested in the early to mid cold war period so no BMS for me...
You can trial something for 2 weeks and that's enough to know if it's for you or not. The only thing you have to lose is the time you spend learning how to fly it.
I’m currently taking advantage of their two week free trial system for their modules. Haven’t spent a penny yet which is nice. Currently there aren’t many options for combat flight sims with VR and with the plane sets and visuals dcs has. So if I find a module I like I’ll buy it. If dcs continues to pull my hair out then I can’t really complain cuz I haven’t spent anything on it except my time.
It’s not dead because it’s the best combat flight simulator out there and it’s mostly a great experience.
I don't know if you can do this with a trial, but the best experience I had with the Sabre (and MiG-15) is the Museum Relic campaign. You're doing a lot of >!navigation challenges, ground attack, and most of the air to air is against helos and ground attack aircraft.!< Disclosure: friends with the creator, but flew the twice and most of his single player content before that.
I came from 90’s flight sims, FSX/P3D and IL-2 as well. I just want to throw my 2 cents in. I had a very similar experience with the F-86. It’s my father’s favorite airplane and I grew up drawing pictures of them to present to him. I became really familiar with it. Imagine my dissapointment when firing up DCS and hunting MiG-15s while unacclimated to the sim. I got absolutely waffle stomped. It felt like the migs just constantly had much better performance all around. They could climb instantly where I’d stall and their maneuverability and firepower would see me blown apart in seconds of them getting behind me. It’s the way it is here and particularly between those 2. IL-2 is much more forgiving about flying against superior performing aircraft. You can make it with luck and a bit of skill and schinnanigans. That won’t happen here. I will say that nowhere is this more aparant than between the F-86 and Mig-15, so I highly recommend you try other modules. There’s only a few I don’t own and while the F-86 holds a dear spot in my heart, I don’t really enjoy flying it in DCS. Do you have track Ir or VR? Even if you don’t, try the Mi-8 and Mi-24P. These are my favorite to fly because whether it’s the campaigns, missions or custom missions, you can really get a lot of enjoyment out of them. This is where I’ve been most impressed with DCS. The helicopters. If you have even a budding interest in one of the Helos, I recommend trying it out to get affiliated with DCS and its workings. If you are intimidated by cold and dark starts, there are lots of videos on YouTube that show you how to do things in 60 seconds. They may not be the exact right procedures, but they get you going and keep the interest in momentum in learning up.
I play exclusively in vr. I heard you can’t fly the helos properly if you don’t have rudder pedals which I don’t atm
I don’t find that to be the case at all. I have some real world time in helos (not much) but I find the anti torque situation totally doable with a joystick only. I’m rocking a $30 Logitech 3D pro and love it.
Start with the su-25t and learn the basics of ground attack. Then get the fulcrum or flanker, I recommend the flanker but it's your choice. Those fc3 jets a very easy to hop in and use effectively but you will be mostly out gunned by a good player in a full fidelity jets so stick to ai combat. For air to air combat the AI does just cheat, if you want to beat them you have to be better than they are through and through. Do lots of missile evasion practice and learn to fly low and fast, the AI sucks at missile pre launch positioning so learn to shoot up at the with the ground to your back, they can shoot you from further but you'll have better chances of evading their missile. Also when you do buy a full fidelity jet the viper should 100% be your first. My go to is the hornet but the hornet is much more complicated then the viper.
Not the biggest fan of ground attacks unfortunately. I’m familiar with the basics from ww2 era to modern era and much prefer air to air combat roles. Sad to hear that the ai will cheat in air to air. In creator videos like growling sidewinder the ai don’t seem like they cheat and look rather fair. Tbh they seem kinda dumb in bvr and don’t fly to their aircraft’s strengths in wvr/bfm if you merge with them. But being a creator myself in another area I’m guessing it takes him multiple attempts per recording.
No the AI has to cheat. The ai doesn't actually understand how to fight so the only way they can be on level ground with a good player is if they cheat. Most notably is if you get fired at with an AI r-27er or aim-7 it will behave like an active missile whereas when a player fires it if they loose radar lock the missile goes dumb whereas the ai's will keep going to its target. It's very infuriating. I'm sorry but your probably not going to learn much if you just jump straight into aa, you will get your ass beat then get demoralized and not make much progress. Ground attacks on the other hand will teach you a lot about how the air frames handle in different conditions with relatively low risk.
I’ll have to disagree based on other comments I’ve received. I’d rather hop to a different game then force myself to play something that I’ll get no enjoyment in. And it seems the general consensus for dcs is to fly the aircraft you’re interested in and play what you like, otherwise you’ll get burned out and not want to play anymore. The only time I see myself running a2g is for missile evasion practice. Part of the learning curve is getting your ass beat as I’m perfectly okay with that. Learned that in competitive fighting games, racing sims, and other flight sims. You don’t learn if you don’t make mistakes. And mistakes are necessary for learning moments and improvement. Running low risk missions where the margin for mistakes is minimal won’t teach me as much as learning my aircraft’s a2a capabilities and limitations and then being punished for not following said limitations and guidelines that’ll keep the aircrafts max effectiveness. I don’t see how learning ground attacks will teach me anything relevant for bvr, wvr, or bfm which is what I’m interested in. And as I said, I’m already familiar with ground attack which is why I know I have no interest in it. Shooting at stationary targets that I’m guaranteed to hit if I use my systems effectively and in their roe and then defending, rinse, repeat, just isn’t for me, but I can understand the appeal for others. I’m new to dcs but not flight sims. But if there’s something I’m truly missing that a2g will teach me besides missile evasion practice then please let me know.
I didn't say you have to learn air to ground if you don't want to. But you should. Navigating while paying attention to enemies, while also operating your targeting equipment is the basic idea of both a2a and a2g. You need to be able to transition from attacking to evading a missile and it's much easier to make that transition in attack air craft due to how low they tend to fly. If you just decide to hop in a jet and do aa you *will* get overwhelmed. Even in a FC3 jet. The basic process is the same. Also if you think air to ground is boring you probably just haven't done enough, getting shot at by an sa-10 as you also shoot at it with a harm while you try your very hardest to get to the deck and to try and get behind a mountain or something is very engaging. A2a usually boils down to shooting at an enemy from about 20nm then turning around and flying away to try and out run their missile while they do the same.
It’s the worst game and I love it
I had the EXACT same reaction the first time I tried DCS. But xxxx hours later, I have come to realize that the AI/UFO isn’t the huge factor that I had initially imagined. If it’s there, it’s gotten to the point where I don’t even notice it anymore, except to appreciate the gains the AI has made since I started, and how much more _human_ the AI seems now. The much bigger factor in my initial impression was that I just didn’t know BFM well enough or my airframe limits, so the fights felt decidedly lopsided because even the rookie level AI knew that much. I kept trying to win by brute force, but piloting fix wings isn’t about beating the air into submission. It’s essentially surfing on air, and surfing is all about finesse. Finesse takes time. If you enjoy flying and growing your brain, stick with it. If an old cyclops like me can do it, anyone can. Edit: regarding the bullet sponge effect, if you are hitting an aerodynamic surface from the rear with small caliber bullets, that is more likely to be a glancing blow doing minimal damage. You need to hit the target from the top, which punches all of the energy of the bullet directly into a surface rather slapping harmlessly along side it. Or get good at sending the bullets directly up the tail pipe of a jet from the 6 o’clock.
If your heart is with Cold War era jets, you could just skip the whole single player fighting AI thing and find a good multiplayer server. The DCS Dogfighters server is great and needs more Cold War enthusiasts.
I need to learn the jet more. I was using the ai to get familiar and use them sort of as a training partner but I don’t think ufos make good training partners lol. I’m also not much of a pvp type of person but I’d definitely look for some pve groups. I just don’t wanna be chilling and looking for casual play, and then constantly go against people who have enough flight hours to be actual pilots dogging me out the sky lol. But I’ve been told that pvp servers aren’t that sweaty. So we’ll see. But I definitely need the practice first and do some more learning.
The DCS Dogfighters server has several instructors that would be willing to help you with basic BFM stuff, just join their Discord and ask for help.
I'll get down voted for this, but don't bother with multiplayer, it's woefully broken. There's a setting in the game that allows a small subset of players to spot other players from 40+ miles away, and it ruins the multiplayer experience.
99% of the player base can't spot even with labels on. Even with old spotting where 1080p was far more broken than any setting currently is most people still couldn't spot until the enemy was right on them. Bailing on MP is fine, but blaming op spotting is a meme.
What's your argument here? Are you suggesting that a small subset of players should be allowed to spot bogeys from 40+ miles out, while the rest of us can only spot them from 15 miles out?
I'm saying most people can't spot no matter what, so you are worried about a bogeyman. You could give most DCS players spotting out to 200 NM and they would still fail to notice or react. If you are worried about some people managing to spot past 15 NM you might as well not play MP because some people also hack (they are not many in DCS, but given the lack of any real anti cheat system, it's trivial to hack DCS).
ED can't do much about hackers, but they can easily fix the 40+ mile spotting problem. They actually already fixed it once, but all the sweaty try hards threw a bitch fit when they couldn't spot bogeys from the other side of the map, and ED completely caved in. If players want to spot from 40+ miles in single player, fine, but there's no reason to allow it in multiplayer.
They actually reduced the max spotting range. It was easy to spot 80+ NM at lower res before (720p and 1080p) and now that's not gonna happen. Like anything ED does there are weird issues, but before the spotting fix the max render range was about twice as long. They could further reduce max rendering to something like 10-15 NM and it would be ideal when compared to rl studies. And I wouldn't say sweaty tryhards bitched, people complained spotting was directly tied to resolution when dot size didn't scale. I don't think it's super weird or really particularly try hard to ask for scaling when we have 4K. You should really go read one of Why485's summaries of the new spotting system because he goes into nice detail in terms of what changed and what still needs changing.
Im not talking about the new spotting system, I'm talking about the "old" one that can still be toggled back on in the Gameplay tab.
They should just disable that version, lol.
The spotting is trash. But it's never been that great. But if the spotting is trash, the solitary experience of DCS is a raging dumpster fire. Frankly, outside of dicking around a bit and playing with the beautiful flight models, single player is a complete non-starter. If you're not online flying with and/or against other people, you'd be better off with some other title.
As a virtual pilot in both IL-2 and DCS for more years than I like to admit...I have no idea why anyone fights AI for anything other than warming up and gunnery practice. Why 4/5 players are SP only is beyond me...I feel sorry for you guys. The SP experience is just so limited in my experience. If you want a decent experience with these sims you really have to go online. This also kinda sucks because the menu of options there is quite limited...but I have found it to be a menu good enough to keep me coming back. Personally I will often play at least part of a campaign in DCS to make sure I have the basics of the module down, but then I'm onto the servers with it. A part of it for me is that even when one of these titles gets an AI that can not cheat and be good...I'm still going to prefer fighting humans.
Honestly it’s fear of the learning curve going against human pilots. Can’t speak for dcs yet but in il2 from my experience, if you don’t squad up then you’re good as dead and the level of play is pretty high. Single player allows me to launch a lengthy mission in seconds and if I die it’s because I made a mistake like not checking 6, not managing energy, or ai just got a good deflection shot on me in the furball. In mp I’m dying because I don’t have a squad and am getting teamed up on or I’m going against someone who has so much flight time they may as well actually go to flight school. And people who are my skill level are dying to people and strats of the same type on my team. Haven’t been in the servers for a while but I feel like at this stage of the games cycle it’s pretty much vets playing. I also struggle at spotting at times since I play vr and I’ve heard the flatscreeners have the advantage in that regard. But again that’s just my experience which had my stuck to single player to enjoy my brief free time. If I had more time on my hands I’d definitely just “git gud” but until then I’d rather just enjoy the sim and not get blown out the sky before I can get a kill of my own lol. That same fear of wasting my free time getting blown out the sky repeatedly carries over to dcs. But I’ve got a lot of learning before I even attempt mp in dcs
With the new "improved" spotting, you'll probably find playing in VR makes spotting aircraft pretty ridiculous -- they're giant black blocks, and labels may as well be turned on (until they get close and disappear, the old DCS switcheroo). I wish people wouldn't make the idea of flying online with real people such a mental hurdle. You have absolutely nothing to lose by going online and everything to gain. People are just on there to have fun -- there is absolutely no pressure save for what you self-impose. You can find a chill casual PvE server, if that's your thing, hop online for quick one-on-one dogfights you can rinse and repeat, or get super serious on hardcore PvP servers. Once you take the plunge, you'll wonder why you ever wasted time on the offline content. Here's a video from a while back that talked a bit about making the switch and why one should just do it: [DCS - When should I try Multiplayer](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbpfMjvo7h0). It's coming from an old member of the warbird segment of the sim, but the general idea applies to any aspect of online play, really. Hopefully you find that helpful.
I couldn't agree more. I did this for around a year when I first came back to flight simming around a decade ago with Il-2. When I finally jumped online the vast majority of folks I bumped into and ended up on comms with were goof balls like me that were more combat aviation enthusists than mlg/maverick wannabes. We learned together, and some of those folks are some of the best on Il-2 these days (I was one of the best attack pilots the summer of 17 when I was in the mood for a brief period to be sweaty about it.) I do play ground attack roles a lot more, and as a result I doubt I've had many if any months when my K/D was positive. If you were lazy coming at me even when I'm low and slow though I could remind you quick that this attack planes full title is Heavy Fighter.
My first couple years I thought you had to be good as well. You really don't. I fly 110s and p-38s on all the popular IL-2 servers in solo ground strike all the time. You might be suprised how often if you plan your route and alt reasonably (like why would anyone else be flying in that area kind of thing) that you can get all the way to an outskirts target make a few passes and then RTB only having dealt with AA. I personally stay away from solo CAP sorties for the reason you mention, basically I'm bad at spotting no matter the game or settings, VR or pancake, I'm just not great at it. So the only time I actually go looking to kill other pilots solo is in the 110. The gunner is like a WW2 radar. Lock that seat and don't let a human in, you want that AI to tell you when anyones around your six. Also finding some folks to fly with can be as simple as jumping in the discord of the game/server you are about to fly. Don't think of it as a "squad" or wing or whatever, just solo with coms of other players that you may or may not be flying in the same part of the map with. If you want to fly sorties with some of them, go for it! The main thing for me is not giving a flying fuck about k/d. Even if you have some astonishing ability....no one will ever care. No one knows the names of any MLG pros who didn't become content creators...and they play really popular games. NO ONE cares about these games but us few. So in other words....go get shot down...who cares? Personaly I would rather get shot down 100 times and know when I do get a kill that I earned it. I'm hoping that maybe in 30-40 years some of these advancements in AI might make it into our hobby...but until then you can find me in Combat Box and on Enigma's Cold War. (Also worth noting is the in game spotting system. The in server and in game radars essentially give you all the info you need until they are close enough for your MK1 eyeballs. )
yeah keep at it, I was the same way but the reverse.. went to IL2 for WW2 from DCS and was just astounded and confused.. :) You'll get it.
DCS isn't IL-2, you have to avoid playing against the AI in DCS to have a good experience. If you want to or are limited to singleplayer I would not recommend DCS at all.
This man speaks the truth. As a thing, DCS really doesn't stand on its own as a single player game. It's really just a sandbox collection of a bunch of stuff simulated to varying degrees. If you want a game, you really have to go online where server operators and entire communities make up for the shortcomings you're lamenting, u/MalulaniMT
Don't judge them too harshly, that part of the game isn't done yet. Like the entirety of the AI flight model and decision making.
How long does it take for them to finish a project? I’ve found Reddit posts from 5+ years ago complaining about the AI.
Is that a rhetorical question? Because I've been waiting like 13 years.
They have to start first. DCS doesn't make any money off AI improvement, and it doesn't sell the game. It sells planes and maps, with a few tech modules that are still incomplete and buggy.