Tree_Beard

I don't necessarily disagree, but I could maybe see two modules released simultaneously with a special bundle deal at release. People who only want one of the two modules when they come out probably have a high likelihood of eventually buying the other one later at full price. Is there any precedent for ED to release multiple things at once or has that never happened?

I like to imagine the map is done but they are holding out to drop it at the same time as the Corsair and a surprise Hellcat module.

Yes, I was finally able to figure it out. Turns out you cant have the AI set on a CAP mission. You need to set the AI mission to Intercept and then set an Attack Group task specifically on the group of bombers.

AI skill level does not seem to have any effect.

I've been messing around in the editor for a while trying to accomplish this, but they always fly right past the bombers to turn and slowly approach from the rear, getting torn apart by machine gun fire from the formation. Can I use the ME to set up a historical head on attack?

The current roster of maps and assets actually greatly limits the level of historic accuracy achievable, so this part of your argument is just straight wrong.

Just because they say there aren't plans to develop the terrain doesn't mean that they aren't doing it for political reasons. Your argument isn't compelling unless you can point me to ED saying otherwise. Happy to be proven wrong if they did. Don't know, but it could have been for a variety of reasons other than politics.

What is the evidence that ED refuses to release certain terrains due to politics? I've heard this suggested many times before and I have a really hard time believing this is actually true.

Vietnam 1968, Kursk 1943, Korea 1952, Ardennes 1944/45.

I hadn't heard this, but what a terrible idea. Why split the already niche combat sim player base further into another ED game instead of just including everything within the same sandbox, which would make DCS better for everyone (more assets = better) and still give players the choice of what level of detail they want to get into.

I'm talking about releasing a pack of aircraft that have the look and feel of full fidelity modules but don't have all the extra bells and whistles like a fully clickable cockpit and all systems modeled in great detail. Not only would this be a much better experience for players and allow mission designers to design more interesting missions, but I think there would also be a huge market for such a release. Plenty of people still buy and enjoy the modern FC3 planes in 2022. Lots of people want the battlespace experience of IL2 with the flight modeling of DCS. ED can really capitalize on this demand. I can also envision additional future low fidelity packs for PTO, Eastern Front, etc that can be released alongside the flagship full fidelity modules. If ED were going to release WW2 FC3 and it was going to be, say, 5 aircraft, what modules would you like to see included?

I agree, but it would also be pointless to add soviet assets without an eastern front or germany map, in my opinion.

That would be awesome, but I wouldn't buy it to fight over the English Channel. We'd need an Eastern Front map too.

As time goes by, I find myself getting more frustrated at the frankly bizarre map development choices ED has made for DCS WW2 (assuming there was any communication between Ugra and ED prior to developing Normandy and Channel). Two literally overlapping maps of the same location with very limited relevance for the set of assets we have in the game. I mean come on. I applaud the creators of this server for trying to make something at least somewhat historically believable within these constraints. Keep up the good work, guys.

This way you would be able to enter the combat zone knowing the approximate area or direction to look for enemy forces, but not their exact location. Just like how it would be in most real life scenarios. Could be useful for ground assets or enemy bandits. This would create a much higher degree of replayability for single player, user created missions. I understand you can add some degree of randomness with triggers and flags now, however it is quite tedious and you still don't end up with much being "unknown" at the end of the day, since you've still hand placed each asset. The "Instant Action" missions already demonstrate that the game engine can generate groups of enemies, with flight plans and orders to engage, that you can fight against. So it seems to me like it would be very possible to incorporate something similar into the mission editor that the player has more control over and can be regenerated each time the mission is run.

This could provide another level of atmosphere for your missions and campaigns, if you choose to use the feature. I'm imagining like mock news reports, an audio mission briefing from a commanding officer or maybe just custom music for the mission.

There have not been any improvements.

I think ideally you'd want a "destruction level" layer to select in the mission editor. Like level 1-5. If its possible to do different seasons, I think it should be fairly straightforward to do layers of battle damage. Another option would be for ED to improve the existing destruction zone trigger to make it look better and function properly without completely tanking performance. I think this is probably not as important for the modern era maps, but in a ww2 "total war" environment, especially in 1944-1945 when most of our existing assets were in use, there should be quite a bit of visible destruction.

Like destroyed towns, shell craters, charred forests, piles of rubble. There is a "scenery destruction zone" trigger in the mission editor now, but that works very poorly in my experience.

We don't need a full 3D interior or the ability to fly the bomber (not that I'm saying that wouldn't be awesome), just the ability to aim the MGs and try to fight off attacking fighters would be great. Maybe there could be a couple machine gun barrels sticking out from your POV if we wanted to get real crazy with it. Let us cycle around the different positions, replacing the AI when we take its seat.

Yes

How great would it be if ED just allowed the community to build maps. That way they could stick to what they do best - creating complex modules to fill the battlespace.

Imagine if the Hellcat, Corsair, Essex carrier, Japanese AI assets and WW2 Marianas map all dropped at the same time. I'd probably need to take a week off work.

Modeling the ocean floor in such a map would be a complete waste of time. It could be completely flat and just a little bit deeper than the max dive of any sub. Honestly I had no idea there even was submarine warfare in DCS, so I think that says something about how important it is currently, although I will concede that maybe it could be more fleshed out in the future. The map would obviously be for carrier/naval ops and the great thing about it would be that you can do modern or WW2 missions without the need for having two different time periods modeled for the terrain. And the full world map? Sounds great. I'm sure the people of the 23rd century will be pumped when it releases.

Why would you assume this? None of the current combined arms vehicles have a cockpit model that I am aware of, yet you can still drive around and fire the guns. Would it be cool to have a fully modeled interior of a b17? yes it would. But, for playing around as a door gunner and shooting at attacking fighters during a bomb raid I don't think you necessarily need anything that elaborate.