DCS Discussion

[Redwolf]

I think I would have preferred the Wildcat for balance with the Zero.

Hellcat vs. Zero will be a bit like a tank against a truck.

[Destraex]

I agree. They need to do some later Japanese aircraft as well.

[Redwolf]

Yeah.

For ETO it doesn't matter that much which timeframe you model since the Spitfire, the Hawker fighters, the Bf 109 and the Fw 190 all developed reasonably evenly, so you get "balance" in most settings.

But the Zero had only minor upgrades. A 1942 simulation gets more "balance" than mid-1944 when Japan only has the zero.

[Tripoli]

I think I would have preferred the Wildcat for balance with the Zero.

Hellcat vs. Zero will be a bit like a tank against a truck.

While I agree with you, some of us virtual pilots need all the help we can get. Me in a F6F vs. a Zero is an even fight....

[Redwolf]

Who is on Steam vs. who is on ED directly?

I am thinking of moving my DCS from Steam to ED. I am aware that this is a one-way street, so I want to make sure I'm not making a mistake. Any of you are aware of disadvantages of the ED install?

[Jarhead0331]

Who is on Steam vs. who is on ED directly?

I am thinking of moving my DCS from Steam to ED. I am aware that this is a one-way street, so I want to make sure I'm not making a mistake. Any of you are aware of disadvantages of the ED install?

I'm on ED. Wouldn't have it any other way...The software has been enhanced drastically since the introduction of the modular installer. It added a lot of the features pioneered by skatezilla in his DCS application. I don't think there is any downside to it.

[Pete Dero]

I started with Ka-50 Blackshark on disk before DCS world existed.

Somewhere along the line this led to the ED installation.

I don't see any negatives not using Steam.

[Destraex]

If DCS goes down then DCS goes down on steam as well as the DCS client. I don't see an advantage on steam except for convenience.

[mbar]

With ED there are more sales and discounts. I moved to ED from Steam a while back.

[Redwolf]

OK, I moved over to ED. Apparently I could actually move back to Steam by disassociating the accounts again.

First impression is that loading is much faster. You might remember that I reported really atrocious loading times that you folks didn't have.

Even most of my free planes arrived, except for the C-130.

[Jarhead0331]

Full fidelity Mig-29A is here.

[Jarhead0331]

Have not watched this in full yet...

Leaked video.

Some discussion and overview.

[Skoop]

I watched the enigma breakdown one, it seems Razbam didn't really do anything.  Nick Grey was leveraging non payment in dcs to force them into a contract for their work in MCS...which Razbam was allowed to pursue initially on their own.  There was no breach.  It seemed like Nick wanted to cash in on something after the fact.  He should have let razbam slide on the tucano, then laid down the ground rules for mcs going forward.

Enigma stated from Nick's mouth that dcs is stricly a cockpit simulator with a good flight model.  They are engineers not game designers.  So, if you wanted more game and less cockpit simulator, dcs is not for you.  The holy grail dynamic campaign will never see the light of day, and this is why there should be competition in the combat flight sim space.  So that one man can't just dish up a shit sandwich and expect everyone to eat it cause there's no other competition.

[Destraex]

Watched the first little bit and so far the whole thing is very hard to follow. It's surprising so far how little each party seems to know about each others operations.

[Destraex]

I watched the enigma breakdown one, it seems Razbam didn't really do anything.  Nick Grey was leveraging non payment in dcs to force them into a contract for their work in MCS...which Razbam was allowed to pursue initially on their own.  There was no breach.  It seemed like Nick wanted to cash in on something after the fact.  He should have let razbam slide on the tucano, then laid down the ground rules for mcs going forward.

Enigma stated from Nick's mouth that dcs is stricly a cockpit simulator with a good flight model.  They are engineers not game designers.  So, if you wanted more game and less cockpit simulator, dcs is not for you.  The holy grail dynamic campaign will never see the light of day, and this is why there should be competition in the combat flight sim space.  So that one man can't just dish up a shit sandwich and expect everyone to eat it cause there's no other competition.

I have finished all 4 videos now. A lot of context about the original problem seems to be missing as far as I could tell. I found it hard to understand accents at times so missed a lot of detail. The below is obviously just speculative and does not represent what actually happened. We really do not know what the actual facts are still.

To me it seemed that one party decided to take it upon themselves to develop and sell an aircraft as a not for profit to his government through DCS, using DCS as the engine?? But this was the most confusing point.
 
It seemed that one party developed an aircraft for his govt\military for free or not for profit perhaps outside of DCS (or using the DCS engine) and then to make profit presented it as a DCS module for private consumption as pretty much done. So he expected to compete with the DCS version of military sims (MCS) which is the military\govt arm of DCS and then sell his module as a private DCS module. Essentially DCS was going to pay for the competitions module.

He considered MCS and DCS to be separate and nothing to do with each other. But the DCS owner considers DCS and MCS the same thing. Just different customers. Especially as the other party knew about MCS.

From what I could tell, DCS\MCS wanted exclusive use of the module and the work put into it. Unreasonable?? I think that's the way it probably works for other deals. But perhaps it only does in "name".

So as a result DCS\MCS want commercial licenses paid for and SDK\TDK investment for military access but not the per seat cost things would normally be for loss of military business?? This is what makes me wonder if the other party was allowing access to the country he developed for free (or at least no profit) through DCS.

DCS stopped paying the other party for all modules at this point?? It seems because of a breach or lack of contract?? Or just as it seemed in the video for leverage?? But that leverage still might be some sort of anti competitive clause from the contracts for the other modules being activated??

What I don't know is if the super tacano had already been sold or activated on the DCS website at this time? Does anybody know if the module they are upset about was ever announced. I don't pay much attention to trainers.

None of it is really really clear on a first listen. It does seem like the video is from the other parties side though as the call is ended by that person at the end of the video. I guess it could have been snipped at the end by whoeever posted the video. Anybody else got a take on it?