DCS:BS will also get the upgraded sound engine in the FC2 compatibility patch, shortly after FC2 release.Dmitry S. Baikov @ Eagle Dynamics wrote:We are working on DCS to saturate all your beloved cores, but it's a long road to go.
Right now, the main part of DCS - simulation and graphics is still single threaded.
Graphics drivers became quite capable of using several cores, that's why multicore cpus does improve performance.
Also, new sound engine is quite cpu-hungry (it is completely software) and runs in a separate thread (actually, 2 threads - one for rendering, another for loading). So, I'd recommend at least a dual core cpu for DCS and FC2.
The new design for simulation part, capable of using many cores, is mostly done, but DCS is a very complex application and converting it to a different internal architecture is not an easy task, so, please, be patient.
Flaming Cliffs 2.0
I think the key word is that FC2 was originally planned as an update that would take the dev team 2 months to complete, but has ended up taking roughly 9 months. This doesn't mean there's a 9 month delay starting now, or from the time Matt Wagner (ED) made the last announcement about one week ago regarding the product and why they are increasing the price.
I was wondering if anyone had heard any news from ED regarding an actual release date? Normally I wouldn't ask about vague and abstract dates, but since I've heard many rumors lately about an "imminent" release I'd like to figure out if I should start thinking (seriously) about building a new rig tomorrow or wait
The sales price was increased to $29.99 USD from $14.99 based on the time invested in the product (9 months vs. 2 months).
I was wondering if anyone had heard any news from ED regarding an actual release date? Normally I wouldn't ask about vague and abstract dates, but since I've heard many rumors lately about an "imminent" release I'd like to figure out if I should start thinking (seriously) about building a new rig tomorrow or wait
The sales price was increased to $29.99 USD from $14.99 based on the time invested in the product (9 months vs. 2 months).
GGTharos @ ED wrote:Wags has given me the ok to discuss this, so I'd like to bring you up to speed on what has been done with missiles and ECM.
ECM:
Missiles:
- 15s start-up any time you power the ECM on
- Burn through moved out
- 25-28nm for fighters with older ECM
- 23-24nm for fighters with newer ECM
- 12nm for strategic and tactical bombers featuring powerful ECM sets
AI changes:
- Fuzes have been given more realistic triggering distances - the most powerful are the AIM-120 and R-77.
- Speeds and ranges have been adjusted to create a good relative representation of these missiles with respect to each other based on real data and corroboration from people in the know. AIM-9 has specifically been significantly sped up, and is almost equal in range and speed to the R-73. This adjustment was done according to RL speed-time-altitude charts for the AIM-9L. For radar guided missiles, the basic range setup is: AIM-7/R-27R < R-77/AIM-120B < AIM-120C < R-27ER.
- ARH missiles will now track down to very low altitude. No more <10m> Other ARH > SARH
- Reduced seeker gimbal limits for radar missiles. Again, here ARH are better than SARH.
- Heat Seekers will not search for targets if launched without a seeker lock. This means launching any heat-seeker without seeker lock will cause that missile to be wasted
- You must now hold the trigger for a short time in order for a missile to launch
- The missile proximity fuze is inhibited for a very short time when the missile launches.
AI will now notch with an accuracy corresponding to their skill. This means that while an excellent AI can lose most of your missiles, an average AI will most likely be hit. While the note on this may be short, the change in gameplay is big.
Basic Aircraft changes:
- F-15C now has an IFF HUD cue for the PDT/STT target
- The MiG-29C will now have a default payload of 6xR-77
- Aircraft flight models adjusted to conform as much as possible to their realistic climb and acceleration capabilities, as well as turning ability.
- MiG-29C should turn better than in FC1
- F-15C now has an energy model based on the -220 engines.
- All flyable fighter aircraft will now be able to go supersonic with their full payload. The exact top speed depends on what you hang on your wings.
- Realistic G-Loc model returned to be more realistic. You can sustain a medium to high-g battle for a long time, but if you abuse it and try to hold 8+ for long you're in trouble. Doing a 'g-warm up exercise' for 15-20 sec at 5g or so will better prepare you for a high-g fight, increasing your tolerance to high-g for a few minutes.
What is the effect effect of these changes on game play?
In general, the idea was to encourage a player to turn away from a missile in order to defeat it.
You will notice changes in how missiles behave with respect to chaff especially. For SARH, I would recommend to launch salvoes of two missiles; chaff is not likely to decoy both of them. The best defense is a notch and orthogonal roll, but this means the defender gives up the fight and the attacker has complete advantage - as it should be.
Aircraft using SARH vs. ARH equipped aircraft will naturally be at disadvantage, however the notch and otherwise beaming ARH missiles and using decoys at an appropriate distance will work.
The longer fuzes mean that maneuvering to dodge the missiles kinematically is now riskier.
The best chances of survival are a combination of beaming, maneuvering and countermeasures.
Note that I am not talking about long-ranged shots, as those tend to be easier to defeat.
I'd like to add that Wags, Yoda and myself campaigned to get much more robust counter-measure rejection (chaff resistance, performance, pk, anything else you'd like to call it) for SARH missiles in order to not make things both more realistic and not so horribly lopsided. There may have been others but I don't hear and know everything.
You will find that SARH chaff-resistance is such that someone who could before easily chaff away all your missiles, will have to try extremely hard to decoy just half of them. Note that this is for head-on or near-head-on engagements.
Overall, all these changes, including visibility as well, will mean that the BVR engagements will now be moved further out. In addition, most BVR kills will now be beyond visual range in terms of simple head to head engagements, especially at medium and high altitude.
-
SilentEagle
- Virtual Thunderbird Alumnus
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:00 pm
- Location: Cincinnati, OH
- Contact:
c0ff from ED wrote:You will get Doppler shift, Mach cone, sound propagation delay, attenuation of high frequencies (and volume) by distance, low-pass filtering of world sounds in the cockpit.
And no old bugs, only brand new ones.
Burnerski @ ED wrote:I have not had much time to really evaluate Flaming Cliffs 2, plus I have the Russian version which makes it more difficult. One thing that I noticed right away is how much more accurate the flight model seems. Where you will realize it the most is in formation flying. I cannot believe how well you can fly formation in FC2. It's almost like real life , yes its that good. I tucked right into fingertip, trail no problem, formation landings no problem. I have just started evaluating FC2 and I'm sure people will find problems, but so far I think this is the best PC flight sim ever produced.
Interesting...Burnerski @ ED wrote:The formation flying was with the SU27. The problem I'm having is getting the manual trim working which you really need to be in trim for good formation work. There may be some sort of auto trim going on , I'm not sure. I don't like auto trim but that's my problem. I think the Eagle has auto trim in RL. Again I have only used the Sim for a couple of hours.
Even without manual trim the formation flying was fantastic you can really sense there is a lot more precision in the flight model calculations in formation. Another thing I noticed was the sensation of speed on the deck is much more realistic. PC flight sims have always seemed slower on the deck than it should be, you just don't get the sensation of things rushing up at you. In that respect FC2 has done a better job of translating the low level speed sensation. Overall sounds are a lot better. The ballistics seem better too. I ripped the wing off my wingman with guns, he was screaming "I'm hit I'm hit" as he spiraled down. heheh. The formation flying is fantastic!
