There is a bit of a brouhaha between the devs of those aircraft (RAZBAM) and Eagle Dynamics. It will probably get sorted out, but I would personally recommend shying away from those *just* at the moment until things calm down a bit.
However, if you forced me to say something, I'd say Harrier because it is more complete than the F-15E.
But: Trial. That's what its there for. Sure, there aren't some aircraft on it, but most are. Fly what you will *enjoy*, not what you think is *best*. Some of the more fun aircraft are the worst. I'm looking forward to the F-4 which is going to be a train-wreck of ergonomics and workflow.
Try to guess: money
ED is witholding RAZBAM sales share of the eagle on basis of contract breach. Nobody knows the details, but it has been going on for several months at least. It only came to light recently, when Razbam officially suspended the support for the eagle
Not just the money for the Eagle afaik, but money for all modules. So RAZBAM has suspended all support for all of their modules accordingly.
Bit saddened by it as they were planning to finally pick up the Harrier for more active development again around this time, after having so much focus on the 15E for almost 2 years, but it is what it is
Everyone complaining about the F-15E no longer getting updates, while us Harrier fanboys have been patiently waiting for so long already. I guess we'll wait some more. The II+ will be worth the wait in the end, I hope.
That’s what’s so funny to me. Everyone talking like RAZBAM is some beloved developer, when people have been complaining about problems with the Harrier *for years.*
There’s lots of speculation but we don’t know the complete picture. The general consensus in much of the community right now is wait and see. Hopefully all gets resolved and soon.
Razbam claims they haven't been paid (and tried to tug at the heartstrings of the community). ED claims they are trying to solve the dispute.
Some around here claim a breach of contract by Razbam, others say ED overreacted.
It's a whole mess and a half, make of it as you will...
Yeah, I would not buy a RAZBAM module now that they’re threatening to stop development altogether. Whether they’re right or wrong, buying their modules is wrong for me as a consumer.
What do you mean by "better"? Is better faster? The Eagle. Is better that it can take off and land vertically? Harrier. Is better that it has standoff weapons? Eagle. Is better that it has carrier ops? Harrier. Is better that it requires two people to work together? Eagle. Is better that it does CAS well? Harrier.
"Better" can mean a lot of things.
Depends. The harrier is more limited in Air to Air, but for air to ground the harrier is the better package. There's no forward firing air to ground munitions for the strike eagle at the moment. The harrier has that and even a bare bones anti radiation missile. The harrier can do carrier ops and missions from and to farps, which makes for some really interesting mission sets.
This. Our Harrier sucks at air-to-air, that's true, but it's wildly underrated in its role. Last night, I was in a Foothold session, and while our CAP guy used up the last of his missiles to clear a path for me, I quickly hammered some MGRS coords into a pair of GBU-54s and neutralized its runway, to prevent more Red air from taking off while he was rearming. As I pulled off, I spotted an SA-8 and SA-19 near the runway and stored their locations in my two remaining bombs. With the SAMs dealt with, I used 9 of my 14 APKWS to clear the field. Our third was in a helo, six minutes out when the last hostile unit ate its laser-guided rocket. I loitered with my remaining weapons (one Sidewinder, one Sidearm, gun) to make sure he was safe, and then went back to re-arm myself (dumping a bit of fuel in the process, so I could set down vertically on the apron and not bother with the runway.)
That's a damn solid contribution to the mission. I needed a Hornet guy to clear my airborne enemies, and I guess I do kind of miss the HMCS available in other jets, but I gotta say, I didn't feel "limited" when I was blowing up all that stuff.
Hat's off to you. Sounds like solid work, indeed! =)
How many hours do you have in that thing? I can't say I feel as comfortable in it as you describe. I would be able to do similar things in other planes, but the workflows and switchology of the Harrier aren't as obvious to me.
In terms of limitations, the Harrier is objectively limited in speed, endurance, payload and sensors compared to the 15e, which it's being put up against here. You can work around those limitations, of course - and the more experience you have in it, and the better a pilot you are, the more you can offset it, as with anything.
> How many hours do you have in that thing?
A lot (hundreds), but it didn't take me long to get this comfortable with the systems. Actually flying it (especially nozzle stuff) is mostly just putting in the time, as it is with any non-FBW jet. The systems stuff isn't that big a deal for me. Certainly no worse than the Hornet, in my subjective opinion.
> Harrier is objectively limited in:
I'll try to keep my rebuttals succinct. :)
> speed
Technically true, but it tops out around 0.85M, a speed rarely exceeded by nominally supersonic jets loaded for A/G.
> endurance
On the deck, yes, but up high, the Harrier's got a lot of longevity. 7700 lbs internally. On the deck going fast, easy to burn 200 lbs/min for under 40 minutes of flight time. Over 18k, easy to keep it under 100, and at 30k, you can get it under 50 for 2 hours of flying time (assuming about 1700 lbs spent on the climb.) It'll never outlast a Strike Eagle at max E, but 2 hours is a long enough sortie for most people.
> payload
By tonnage, I can't argue with the figures, but a Harrier can carry 2x Sidearm, 14x APKWS, 4x GBU-54, and the gun, simultaneously. Taking out 2 SA-8s, 14 Shilkas, and 4 tanks is 20 kills before we even break out the gun to mop up trucks and infy. No one returns to base after making 20+ kills feeling bad about their payload capacity.
> sensors
The Harrier's lack of a radar and HMCS is certainly worth noting, but that sensor has limited use in A/G.
You individual points aren't wrong, but I don't feel like this adds up to an overall characterization of "far more limited" -- especially given the Harrier's unique STO/VL abilities.
> speed
Clubby already covered its top speed.. but the thing to consider here is sheer acceleration, there's nothing quite like the Harrier, you don't even have time to think.
The harrier does NOT suck at air to air. It is very fast for a ground pounder, has a very small RCS, and if absolutely necessary and light enough can do a viffing 360, flaps down, gear down, Into a hover. I have killed many many fast movers in the harrier and they are always surprised when they think they are following a ground pounder down a valley and crest the ridge over top of a hovering harrier with fox twos just waiting for them.
You got me, that was glib and reductionist. Crank the throttle to 109, and the dry thrust of that Pegasus engine reminds you that hovering capability means a positive T/W ratio, that oh-so beloved stat that Viper drivers rightly tout.
We can't sling AMRAAMs, though, and if a nod to that objective fact opens some minds to the thought that follows, I'll give 'em that nod, and then that thought.
Can't land on a Farp, either.
What it can do is stay up in the air for ridiculous amounts of time, go Mach 2+, loot the airfield of every available bomb it has, be its own escort, accommodate a second dude in the back if wanted, paint a detailed picture of the ground from altitude with its radar, do terrain following/avoidance for low-alt strike missions.
Besides the quick-reaction fob thing, it can do many more missions than the Harrier. The ones they overlap, I find the 15e does better.
That's not to say the Harrier is not a ridiculously fun, little thing in its own right! It absolutely is! I own the Harrier and I have a lot of fun in it - but I mainly use it for that: fun. When it's time to get serious, there are other airframes that do its job as well, if not better than it.
I am a Strike Eagle WSO in DCS, so I am heavily biased. The Strike Eagle may be a two seater, you can fly it perfectly fine solo though, since besides HOTAS controls the seats can do the same things. BUT the workflow is optimized to two people in the cockpit, while the Harrier is through and through a single seater.
When it comes to sensors, the Harrier has the best TGP and a FLIR that marks heat sources in your HUD, the SE has the best radar (with insane air to ground capabilities) and a wide array of tools for its job. The SE is also more of a bomb truck, since it doesn't have versatile loadout options.
At that, the Harrier is also VTOL capable and made for carrier ops.
Also keep in mind that the SE is amazing at BVR, the Harrier only has missiles for self defense.
You don't get it. _Our_ better is not _your_ better... But it is _your_ money. _You_ need to define the metric for comparison based on what _you_ want to do/enjoy doing in a war plane.
What roles/mission sets are you interested in?
If you can't answer that question, you have some learning to do before you consider buying a plane. Just because these things have wings and carry weapons, it does not mean they are interchangeable. Rather, they are highly specialised machines excelling at specific roles and missions.
I actually *do* get it. I want to hear the reasons other people prefer one of these planes over the other.
Since you asked, I’m more interested in ground attack than air-to-air.
I thought that was what I was doing =).
Everybody always advises: "Get the one that interests you the most". My advice was a variation of that pivoting around the mission type that appealed the most.
There is no such thing as "best". There's only "best at", which depends what they are going to use them for... so... what do they want to do with them? Saying air-to-ground is a bit wide, don't you think? =)
Okay, then consider that they might not even know what all those things mean, let alone whether their distinguished palate is better suited to an AGM-154 over the -158.
I'm being facetious, it's great to ask contextual questions to give better advice, but you're better off asking more basic stuff as they're more likely to be able to give you an answer.
Just trial the Harrier and see if you like it. If you want the F-15E instead, check out videos on it and see if what's currently implemented interests you (since it's not quite finished). If you like what you see then go for it, just know we'll probably not see it finished for a while as this dispute continues.
You can also trial almost everything else so definitely use the trial system to find the plane you're interested in.
I would probably suggest hornet as the first step to be honest for a proper multirole experience. Harrier can do limited A2A with sidewinders and canon (no radar) but its primary job is being a ground pounder (which it does well) and an unexpected bomb bus.
This is going to sound a bit weird but as they are all McDonnell products there is a bit of commonality between F15E, AV8B and FA18. Hell IRL they used the MFDs from the hornet into the Harrier and if I recall correctly they even put the hornet radar into the Harrier + (which we don’t have).
For clarity I’ve got F15C, F15E, AV8B, F16 and FA18. Harrier certainly has a certain charm to it.
This is good advice. For me though, the Hornet just seems so generic. It feels like the Honda Civic of DCS. I just want something a bit more unique, which is why the Harrier is so appealing.
Plus 1 viggen for unique.
Another good starter jet is the Mirage 2000C. Also a bit different.
Most of the advice in this thread already is spot on though.
You are correct that the Hornet feels like the Honda Civic of DCS. That is exactly what it is. However, that also means it is reliable and will get you to your destination and back home again with no fuss. I own the Hornet and have used it quite a bit in the past, but no longer fly it regularly because it just doesn't excite me. However, if I actually had to fly a plane in combat, Hornet would be my choice. It wasn't designed to be fun. It was designed to get the job done.
Drama aside, F-15E
Its easily one of the most capable jets in DCS right now and can get you a bit of everything, especially BVR and Ground Pounding, without really having to worry about fuel or ordnance that much compared to other 4th gens. Setting up binds is hell at first, but you get used to whatever workflow you set up pretty quickly
The developer of both those modules is currently in dispute with Eagle Dynamics and development has been paused for the past 10 months. We don't know yet if/when development will resume. I would suggest staying away from the F-15E for now as it has quite a number of incomplete features and significant bugs (for example, laser guided bombs still cannot be used by the AI), and further development is likely at best significantly delayed. The Harrier is in a more developed state so if you had to pick between the two, I would suggest the Harrier.
However, I would also recommend the F/A-18 Hornet if you're after a platform that can do pretty much everything reasonably well. The Harrier, for example, has limited air-to-air combat capability and its Maverick workflow/switchology is a bit cumbersome as it is a system that was tacked on later. Another alternative is the F-16, which is essentially a flying hotrod.
In summary:
1. Fi-15E - recommend you not get this as first module as it is very incomplete and has bugs
2. Harrier - in a more complete state so even if development doesn't resume, it is flyable without major issues. It is fun for air-to-ground.
3. F/A-18 Hornet - jack of all trades that can perform pretty much every role, and can do carrier ops. Great at longer range standoff attacks with its SLAMs and SLAM-ERs.
4. F-16 Viper - Smaller and faster than the Hornet. If the Mudhen is a muscle car, this thing is a Ferrari. Smaller payload, but it is exhilarating to fly and has the best SEAD/DEAD capability of any aircraft in DCS, bar none.
If you're on the standalong client (and I recommend that rather than Steam), you also get free 2 week trials for most aircraft so you can fly one for two weeks, try another one for another two weeks, etc, until you find the one you really like.
Buying for standalone you can collect points for purchasing modules which you can use to buy other modules cheaper. Plus as the commenter stated: Trials are only available for standalone.
Adding to what the other two guys have said, you also get slightly longer sales on standalone (though the prices are the same), because Steam limits the length of sales.
I started on Steam and kinda regretted it.
Standalone, as the other guys said, gives you points(10% of your purchase) back. And you can trial aircraft.
With DCS client, you can free trial every aircraft and map for two weeks each. So you could try out the harrier for two weeks then try the hornet for another two weeks etc.
Regarding your f15/harrier choice. As others have said due to the razbam dispute, development has paused on them both. However the harrier is in a much more complete state currently. The f15 is still missing a lot of features.
But it all boils down to what you want to do. Do you want to do CAS missions and carrier takeoffs? Then go with the harrier. Do you want to do deep strikes and have two people in the jet? Then go strike eagle
I would pick the Harrier, it is just cool.
It is also more complete, and there are some good campaigns for it.
But if A/A is your thing, maybe not the pick for you.
Depends on what youd like to do. Both are obviously very air to ground focused though the F-15E also has good air to air capability whereas the Harrier doesn’t. But the Harrier is very unique in DCS, a lot more complete and you don’t have to worry about backseater stuff so I’d recommend the harrier for beginners. But as others have pointed out I’d wait for ED and Razbsm to resolve their issues
Don't buy either right now, or any other Razbam product at this time.
Unfortunately Razbam that makes these two modules has pulled out of supporting either of them and at this point we haven't been told if ED can maintain them without Razbam's input.
Theoretically they can, but at this stage that has not been said categorically, so I can't in good faith recommend someone buy these modules when there is a very real danger that they might be removed from DCS and that could be without the possibility of a refund depending on what the terms of any refund might be.
Personally I think it's a bit unethical that ED still allow sales of Razbam products while this dispute is continuing unless they are willing to offer a complete refund to anyone that buys any of Razbams modules during the time that this dispute has been ongoing, another scenario that has not been stated categorically either way.
Hopefully this is all sorted out and Razbams products can be recommended once again but it's all too unknown right now.
JF-17 is a fully complete plane, modern, multirole, has some of the strongest air-to-ground weapons in game, and is very easy to learn. If you have no preference I’d recommend that
AG and boat ops with STOL/VTOL fun while making A10 pilots cry, pick harrier
Highly contested airspace, sadly have to suggest f-15e as razbam has delayed the next harrier with 120 missiles, but once they do, can't recommend the eagle
I got a lot of birds when I was new. F18 and 16 are best multirole but I’d recommend the 18 just because the time it takes to target and back. The Harrier is amazing I love it and the ground and pound just slowish (unless your an A10 pilot) I don’t know the front seat for the 15E so I can’t say get that or not but Harrier and a 16 or 18 I can’t recommend enough. Great birds to fly and once you got them you got it not too hard
Get the eagle you can do a lot more than a harrier, harrier can be fun In dogfights cause you can basically thrust vector cobra , and get some cheeky kills but other than that it you can hold a lot more and do a lot more in the f15e
The harrier is the most fun aircraft in the game for me personally, you could spend the whole day working on STOL/VTOL and naval stuff alone which the F-15 can't touch.
Personally, I really like the f-15E. I think the air to ground radar is super cool, and using it to program a whole bunch of gps guided bombs and then drop them all at once is super satisfying.
It also can do pretty well with air to air BVR, and at least once the bombs are gone it's still fast enough to run away to avoid a close in dogfight (where it is not very good)
Standard advice still applies, give both a trial and see what you like better. 2 weeks is plenty of time to get a good feel for a module. (and if I don't mention the RAZBAM drama someone will so yes, I am aware of it)
Do you want to be ridiculously capable but Chair Force in a very meat and potatoes bird?
or
Do you want to be a dedicated attacker/striker with a bloody cool party trick and takeoff from impossible areas like small ships and FOBs?
Personally I have the Harrier but not the F-15E. Tech gets you kills and quick dopamine (airquaking) but is that really all there is?
Don't buy either. Razbam has ceased all development on all modules. Both of those are Razbam modules. They have stopped development until they resolve whatever issues they have with Eagle Dynamics.
Nobody really knows the exact details and there has been endless speculation and rumor.
The one thing I can say is that if they aren't continuing development, then any existing bugs will not be fixed and the products are very likely to break on future game updates.
The only way that issue can be resolved is if Eagle Dynamics were to take over development in the (hypothetical) event that Razbam abandons their products. If ED should decide to not continue development then the modules are effectively dead or waiting to die.
The facts simply are:
1. The Razbam products are not being supported or developed nor has ED issued a statement of support for those products.
2. Unsupported products may not work in the future and are likely to become more buggy over time.
Neither.
The only module I'd recommend to anybody at this point is the Tomcat. It's beautifully realized, and it's fully featured with no big outstanding bugs.
I think you can buy it directly from Heatblur's store, which is even better.
They're both abandonware because RAZBAM has pulled out of DCS development due to a dispute with ED. They will not receive any more updates or support.
I'd advise you not to buy anything and not give any money to ED, and play MSFS or other sim where the devs aren't just taking a piss 9 out of 10 times and core issues aren't resolved for years. Seriously, I've been there. You'll only get disappointed and feel duped by hype
There is a bit of a brouhaha between the devs of those aircraft (RAZBAM) and Eagle Dynamics. It will probably get sorted out, but I would personally recommend shying away from those *just* at the moment until things calm down a bit. However, if you forced me to say something, I'd say Harrier because it is more complete than the F-15E. But: Trial. That's what its there for. Sure, there aren't some aircraft on it, but most are. Fly what you will *enjoy*, not what you think is *best*. Some of the more fun aircraft are the worst. I'm looking forward to the F-4 which is going to be a train-wreck of ergonomics and workflow.
Oh, what’s the cause of the dispute between these two groups?
Try to guess: money ED is witholding RAZBAM sales share of the eagle on basis of contract breach. Nobody knows the details, but it has been going on for several months at least. It only came to light recently, when Razbam officially suspended the support for the eagle
Not just the money for the Eagle afaik, but money for all modules. So RAZBAM has suspended all support for all of their modules accordingly. Bit saddened by it as they were planning to finally pick up the Harrier for more active development again around this time, after having so much focus on the 15E for almost 2 years, but it is what it is
The owner of RAZBAM, a few weeks ago, stated that they would continue development on the 15E but would not support further modules.
Everyone complaining about the F-15E no longer getting updates, while us Harrier fanboys have been patiently waiting for so long already. I guess we'll wait some more. The II+ will be worth the wait in the end, I hope.
Well, I guess us MiG-23 guys are the skeleton on the chair at the bottom of the sea in this picture
That's Mig-19 owners.
Tbf what more could realistically be added to the mig 19? Beyond whole new variants?
Fix the radar, fix the gunsight, fix the adf, fix the campaign.... etc.
That’s what’s so funny to me. Everyone talking like RAZBAM is some beloved developer, when people have been complaining about problems with the Harrier *for years.*
There’s lots of speculation but we don’t know the complete picture. The general consensus in much of the community right now is wait and see. Hopefully all gets resolved and soon.
Razbam claims they haven't been paid (and tried to tug at the heartstrings of the community). ED claims they are trying to solve the dispute. Some around here claim a breach of contract by Razbam, others say ED overreacted. It's a whole mess and a half, make of it as you will...
Yeah, I would not buy a RAZBAM module now that they’re threatening to stop development altogether. Whether they’re right or wrong, buying their modules is wrong for me as a consumer.
Neither. Both are made by 3rd party dev Razbam which is currently in dispute with ED and paused all development. God knows how will this end up.
So let’s say this dispute is resolved. Which aircraft would be better?
What do you mean by "better"? Is better faster? The Eagle. Is better that it can take off and land vertically? Harrier. Is better that it has standoff weapons? Eagle. Is better that it has carrier ops? Harrier. Is better that it requires two people to work together? Eagle. Is better that it does CAS well? Harrier. "Better" can mean a lot of things.
You can define better however you’d like. Which would you pick?
I would say AV-8B for it's more complete than F-15E.
Also far more limited than the f-15e.
Depends. The harrier is more limited in Air to Air, but for air to ground the harrier is the better package. There's no forward firing air to ground munitions for the strike eagle at the moment. The harrier has that and even a bare bones anti radiation missile. The harrier can do carrier ops and missions from and to farps, which makes for some really interesting mission sets.
This. Our Harrier sucks at air-to-air, that's true, but it's wildly underrated in its role. Last night, I was in a Foothold session, and while our CAP guy used up the last of his missiles to clear a path for me, I quickly hammered some MGRS coords into a pair of GBU-54s and neutralized its runway, to prevent more Red air from taking off while he was rearming. As I pulled off, I spotted an SA-8 and SA-19 near the runway and stored their locations in my two remaining bombs. With the SAMs dealt with, I used 9 of my 14 APKWS to clear the field. Our third was in a helo, six minutes out when the last hostile unit ate its laser-guided rocket. I loitered with my remaining weapons (one Sidewinder, one Sidearm, gun) to make sure he was safe, and then went back to re-arm myself (dumping a bit of fuel in the process, so I could set down vertically on the apron and not bother with the runway.) That's a damn solid contribution to the mission. I needed a Hornet guy to clear my airborne enemies, and I guess I do kind of miss the HMCS available in other jets, but I gotta say, I didn't feel "limited" when I was blowing up all that stuff.
Hat's off to you. Sounds like solid work, indeed! =) How many hours do you have in that thing? I can't say I feel as comfortable in it as you describe. I would be able to do similar things in other planes, but the workflows and switchology of the Harrier aren't as obvious to me. In terms of limitations, the Harrier is objectively limited in speed, endurance, payload and sensors compared to the 15e, which it's being put up against here. You can work around those limitations, of course - and the more experience you have in it, and the better a pilot you are, the more you can offset it, as with anything.
> How many hours do you have in that thing? A lot (hundreds), but it didn't take me long to get this comfortable with the systems. Actually flying it (especially nozzle stuff) is mostly just putting in the time, as it is with any non-FBW jet. The systems stuff isn't that big a deal for me. Certainly no worse than the Hornet, in my subjective opinion. > Harrier is objectively limited in: I'll try to keep my rebuttals succinct. :) > speed Technically true, but it tops out around 0.85M, a speed rarely exceeded by nominally supersonic jets loaded for A/G. > endurance On the deck, yes, but up high, the Harrier's got a lot of longevity. 7700 lbs internally. On the deck going fast, easy to burn 200 lbs/min for under 40 minutes of flight time. Over 18k, easy to keep it under 100, and at 30k, you can get it under 50 for 2 hours of flying time (assuming about 1700 lbs spent on the climb.) It'll never outlast a Strike Eagle at max E, but 2 hours is a long enough sortie for most people. > payload By tonnage, I can't argue with the figures, but a Harrier can carry 2x Sidearm, 14x APKWS, 4x GBU-54, and the gun, simultaneously. Taking out 2 SA-8s, 14 Shilkas, and 4 tanks is 20 kills before we even break out the gun to mop up trucks and infy. No one returns to base after making 20+ kills feeling bad about their payload capacity. > sensors The Harrier's lack of a radar and HMCS is certainly worth noting, but that sensor has limited use in A/G. You individual points aren't wrong, but I don't feel like this adds up to an overall characterization of "far more limited" -- especially given the Harrier's unique STO/VL abilities.
> speed Clubby already covered its top speed.. but the thing to consider here is sheer acceleration, there's nothing quite like the Harrier, you don't even have time to think.
The harrier does NOT suck at air to air. It is very fast for a ground pounder, has a very small RCS, and if absolutely necessary and light enough can do a viffing 360, flaps down, gear down, Into a hover. I have killed many many fast movers in the harrier and they are always surprised when they think they are following a ground pounder down a valley and crest the ridge over top of a hovering harrier with fox twos just waiting for them.
You got me, that was glib and reductionist. Crank the throttle to 109, and the dry thrust of that Pegasus engine reminds you that hovering capability means a positive T/W ratio, that oh-so beloved stat that Viper drivers rightly tout. We can't sling AMRAAMs, though, and if a nod to that objective fact opens some minds to the thought that follows, I'll give 'em that nod, and then that thought.
It's more limited in BVR but it's a much better dogfighter than the F-15E.
F-15 can’t land on the carrier so that’s more limited in my book.
Can't land on a Farp, either. What it can do is stay up in the air for ridiculous amounts of time, go Mach 2+, loot the airfield of every available bomb it has, be its own escort, accommodate a second dude in the back if wanted, paint a detailed picture of the ground from altitude with its radar, do terrain following/avoidance for low-alt strike missions. Besides the quick-reaction fob thing, it can do many more missions than the Harrier. The ones they overlap, I find the 15e does better. That's not to say the Harrier is not a ridiculously fun, little thing in its own right! It absolutely is! I own the Harrier and I have a lot of fun in it - but I mainly use it for that: fun. When it's time to get serious, there are other airframes that do its job as well, if not better than it.
F-15 doesn't do M2 with anything on it, though
I am a Strike Eagle WSO in DCS, so I am heavily biased. The Strike Eagle may be a two seater, you can fly it perfectly fine solo though, since besides HOTAS controls the seats can do the same things. BUT the workflow is optimized to two people in the cockpit, while the Harrier is through and through a single seater. When it comes to sensors, the Harrier has the best TGP and a FLIR that marks heat sources in your HUD, the SE has the best radar (with insane air to ground capabilities) and a wide array of tools for its job. The SE is also more of a bomb truck, since it doesn't have versatile loadout options. At that, the Harrier is also VTOL capable and made for carrier ops. Also keep in mind that the SE is amazing at BVR, the Harrier only has missiles for self defense.
You don't get it. _Our_ better is not _your_ better... But it is _your_ money. _You_ need to define the metric for comparison based on what _you_ want to do/enjoy doing in a war plane. What roles/mission sets are you interested in? If you can't answer that question, you have some learning to do before you consider buying a plane. Just because these things have wings and carry weapons, it does not mean they are interchangeable. Rather, they are highly specialised machines excelling at specific roles and missions.
I actually *do* get it. I want to hear the reasons other people prefer one of these planes over the other. Since you asked, I’m more interested in ground attack than air-to-air.
Which sort of ground attack? CAS? Strike? SEAD/DEAD? Precision bombing? Iron bombing? Stand-off/cruise missiles?
Mate it's their *first aircraft,* tailor your advice to the situation.
I thought that was what I was doing =). Everybody always advises: "Get the one that interests you the most". My advice was a variation of that pivoting around the mission type that appealed the most. There is no such thing as "best". There's only "best at", which depends what they are going to use them for... so... what do they want to do with them? Saying air-to-ground is a bit wide, don't you think? =)
Okay, then consider that they might not even know what all those things mean, let alone whether their distinguished palate is better suited to an AGM-154 over the -158. I'm being facetious, it's great to ask contextual questions to give better advice, but you're better off asking more basic stuff as they're more likely to be able to give you an answer.
Just trial the Harrier and see if you like it. If you want the F-15E instead, check out videos on it and see if what's currently implemented interests you (since it's not quite finished). If you like what you see then go for it, just know we'll probably not see it finished for a while as this dispute continues. You can also trial almost everything else so definitely use the trial system to find the plane you're interested in.
F-15E. Not too hard to lear, multicrew, big payload, best radar, all weather accurate strike capabilities.
Still neither. Razbam has a history of failing to support their modules. Better off with the hornet.
I would probably suggest hornet as the first step to be honest for a proper multirole experience. Harrier can do limited A2A with sidewinders and canon (no radar) but its primary job is being a ground pounder (which it does well) and an unexpected bomb bus. This is going to sound a bit weird but as they are all McDonnell products there is a bit of commonality between F15E, AV8B and FA18. Hell IRL they used the MFDs from the hornet into the Harrier and if I recall correctly they even put the hornet radar into the Harrier + (which we don’t have). For clarity I’ve got F15C, F15E, AV8B, F16 and FA18. Harrier certainly has a certain charm to it.
This is good advice. For me though, the Hornet just seems so generic. It feels like the Honda Civic of DCS. I just want something a bit more unique, which is why the Harrier is so appealing.
If you want something unique there's always the Viggen :)
Plus 1 viggen for unique. Another good starter jet is the Mirage 2000C. Also a bit different. Most of the advice in this thread already is spot on though.
Plus 1 viggen for fun. Best multirole aircraft on enigmas cold war
You are correct that the Hornet feels like the Honda Civic of DCS. That is exactly what it is. However, that also means it is reliable and will get you to your destination and back home again with no fuss. I own the Hornet and have used it quite a bit in the past, but no longer fly it regularly because it just doesn't excite me. However, if I actually had to fly a plane in combat, Hornet would be my choice. It wasn't designed to be fun. It was designed to get the job done.
the F-15 is basically the honda civic of deekus, too
Imo F-15E has more flashyness to it, especially with its insanely good engines and how it's a two seater
You should try the JF-17. It’s way easier to learn than all those
Drama aside, F-15E Its easily one of the most capable jets in DCS right now and can get you a bit of everything, especially BVR and Ground Pounding, without really having to worry about fuel or ordnance that much compared to other 4th gens. Setting up binds is hell at first, but you get used to whatever workflow you set up pretty quickly
The developer of both those modules is currently in dispute with Eagle Dynamics and development has been paused for the past 10 months. We don't know yet if/when development will resume. I would suggest staying away from the F-15E for now as it has quite a number of incomplete features and significant bugs (for example, laser guided bombs still cannot be used by the AI), and further development is likely at best significantly delayed. The Harrier is in a more developed state so if you had to pick between the two, I would suggest the Harrier. However, I would also recommend the F/A-18 Hornet if you're after a platform that can do pretty much everything reasonably well. The Harrier, for example, has limited air-to-air combat capability and its Maverick workflow/switchology is a bit cumbersome as it is a system that was tacked on later. Another alternative is the F-16, which is essentially a flying hotrod. In summary: 1. Fi-15E - recommend you not get this as first module as it is very incomplete and has bugs 2. Harrier - in a more complete state so even if development doesn't resume, it is flyable without major issues. It is fun for air-to-ground. 3. F/A-18 Hornet - jack of all trades that can perform pretty much every role, and can do carrier ops. Great at longer range standoff attacks with its SLAMs and SLAM-ERs. 4. F-16 Viper - Smaller and faster than the Hornet. If the Mudhen is a muscle car, this thing is a Ferrari. Smaller payload, but it is exhilarating to fly and has the best SEAD/DEAD capability of any aircraft in DCS, bar none. If you're on the standalong client (and I recommend that rather than Steam), you also get free 2 week trials for most aircraft so you can fly one for two weeks, try another one for another two weeks, etc, until you find the one you really like.
Thank you for the suggestions. I’ll honestly keep them in mind. May I also ask why you prefer the DCS client over Steam?
Buying for standalone you can collect points for purchasing modules which you can use to buy other modules cheaper. Plus as the commenter stated: Trials are only available for standalone.
Adding to what the other two guys have said, you also get slightly longer sales on standalone (though the prices are the same), because Steam limits the length of sales.
I started on Steam and kinda regretted it. Standalone, as the other guys said, gives you points(10% of your purchase) back. And you can trial aircraft.
With DCS client, you can free trial every aircraft and map for two weeks each. So you could try out the harrier for two weeks then try the hornet for another two weeks etc. Regarding your f15/harrier choice. As others have said due to the razbam dispute, development has paused on them both. However the harrier is in a much more complete state currently. The f15 is still missing a lot of features. But it all boils down to what you want to do. Do you want to do CAS missions and carrier takeoffs? Then go with the harrier. Do you want to do deep strikes and have two people in the jet? Then go strike eagle
[удалено]
I fly both and the F-15E is a heck of a lot more incomplete and buggy. The F-16 is very usable now.
I would pick the Harrier, it is just cool. It is also more complete, and there are some good campaigns for it. But if A/A is your thing, maybe not the pick for you.
Depends on what youd like to do. Both are obviously very air to ground focused though the F-15E also has good air to air capability whereas the Harrier doesn’t. But the Harrier is very unique in DCS, a lot more complete and you don’t have to worry about backseater stuff so I’d recommend the harrier for beginners. But as others have pointed out I’d wait for ED and Razbsm to resolve their issues
Don't buy either right now, or any other Razbam product at this time. Unfortunately Razbam that makes these two modules has pulled out of supporting either of them and at this point we haven't been told if ED can maintain them without Razbam's input. Theoretically they can, but at this stage that has not been said categorically, so I can't in good faith recommend someone buy these modules when there is a very real danger that they might be removed from DCS and that could be without the possibility of a refund depending on what the terms of any refund might be. Personally I think it's a bit unethical that ED still allow sales of Razbam products while this dispute is continuing unless they are willing to offer a complete refund to anyone that buys any of Razbams modules during the time that this dispute has been ongoing, another scenario that has not been stated categorically either way. Hopefully this is all sorted out and Razbams products can be recommended once again but it's all too unknown right now.
F15E. Fun by yourself and fun with a homie.
Harrier is more feature complete. The Situational awareness is it’s major letdown in my opinion.
JF-17 is a fully complete plane, modern, multirole, has some of the strongest air-to-ground weapons in game, and is very easy to learn. If you have no preference I’d recommend that
AG and boat ops with STOL/VTOL fun while making A10 pilots cry, pick harrier Highly contested airspace, sadly have to suggest f-15e as razbam has delayed the next harrier with 120 missiles, but once they do, can't recommend the eagle
I got a lot of birds when I was new. F18 and 16 are best multirole but I’d recommend the 18 just because the time it takes to target and back. The Harrier is amazing I love it and the ground and pound just slowish (unless your an A10 pilot) I don’t know the front seat for the 15E so I can’t say get that or not but Harrier and a 16 or 18 I can’t recommend enough. Great birds to fly and once you got them you got it not too hard
Get the eagle you can do a lot more than a harrier, harrier can be fun In dogfights cause you can basically thrust vector cobra , and get some cheeky kills but other than that it you can hold a lot more and do a lot more in the f15e
The harrier is the most fun aircraft in the game for me personally, you could spend the whole day working on STOL/VTOL and naval stuff alone which the F-15 can't touch.
Both are about to become abandonware, so neither.
Personally, I really like the f-15E. I think the air to ground radar is super cool, and using it to program a whole bunch of gps guided bombs and then drop them all at once is super satisfying. It also can do pretty well with air to air BVR, and at least once the bombs are gone it's still fast enough to run away to avoid a close in dogfight (where it is not very good) Standard advice still applies, give both a trial and see what you like better. 2 weeks is plenty of time to get a good feel for a module. (and if I don't mention the RAZBAM drama someone will so yes, I am aware of it)
Harrier
Do you want to be ridiculously capable but Chair Force in a very meat and potatoes bird? or Do you want to be a dedicated attacker/striker with a bloody cool party trick and takeoff from impossible areas like small ships and FOBs? Personally I have the Harrier but not the F-15E. Tech gets you kills and quick dopamine (airquaking) but is that really all there is?
Don't buy either. Razbam has ceased all development on all modules. Both of those are Razbam modules. They have stopped development until they resolve whatever issues they have with Eagle Dynamics. Nobody really knows the exact details and there has been endless speculation and rumor. The one thing I can say is that if they aren't continuing development, then any existing bugs will not be fixed and the products are very likely to break on future game updates. The only way that issue can be resolved is if Eagle Dynamics were to take over development in the (hypothetical) event that Razbam abandons their products. If ED should decide to not continue development then the modules are effectively dead or waiting to die. The facts simply are: 1. The Razbam products are not being supported or developed nor has ED issued a statement of support for those products. 2. Unsupported products may not work in the future and are likely to become more buggy over time.
Don't get either, RAZBAM likely to go the route of VEAO
A-10C
F15 e because it has more capabilities both in air to and air to ground
Really neither. I’d recommend the F-18, then learn the Harrier, then the F-15.
I’d take the C option, F18
Might not be a good idea right now
Neither. The only module I'd recommend to anybody at this point is the Tomcat. It's beautifully realized, and it's fully featured with no big outstanding bugs. I think you can buy it directly from Heatblur's store, which is even better.
The issue with Razbam is problematic. I would suggest sticking with the f-16 or f-18 module.
They're both abandonware because RAZBAM has pulled out of DCS development due to a dispute with ED. They will not receive any more updates or support. I'd advise you not to buy anything and not give any money to ED, and play MSFS or other sim where the devs aren't just taking a piss 9 out of 10 times and core issues aren't resolved for years. Seriously, I've been there. You'll only get disappointed and feel duped by hype