cfrag

That's not a beginner's item, that simply the price of admission, and it applies to everyone. To me, it's like saying that for a beginner Paraglider the upfront cost are too high. Lowering the cost of admission is not making DCS more beginner friendly if for the full admission you still have to spend. It's a data point, surely, and maybe there is something that ED can do to lower the cost across the board - but I doubt that there is much that they can do. After all, complaining that playing Half-Life Alyx has high upfront cost (you need a good VR set) is similarly missing the point entirely. The game costs a small fraction of the hardware required to play it, and with DCS it's similar. IMHO DCS's challenges lie elsewhere. Now, that is indeed a big challenge, and it is painful to me to see how much the kind folk at ED fumble this one over and over again. Terrible UI/UX, terrible tutorials, nothing to do, and content creation tools that harken from a millennia past. Look at the current implementation of DCS's control configuration. It's unintuitive, badly made, and squanders one chance after the other to make getting into DCS a quick, fun experience: Have a fun, interactive experience for a newcomer to set up a simple aircraft, the core controls - after all you only need a few inputs to control any aircraft: pitch, bank, thrust. Gear and Flaps. Optionally Yaw and perhaps wheel brakes. That's it. Enough to fly most planes. If you are smart, you also allow the player to copy your current settings for 'core' controls to all your planes. Because I wager that they are the same for all planes. They are for mine, and I own them all. DCS squanders this chance by displaying a user-hostile interface with myriads of unintelligible (for the beginner) choices, burying the few important settings in an avalanche of unimportant ones. Some hard-core people confuse complexity with sophistication here. It's not sophisticated. It's just crappy UI/UX design. Making this simple step of getting into the cockpit more fun and simple could go a long way. DCS has been obnoxiously bad in this regard for decades. Similarly bad are the experiences to be had for content generation. Be they Instant Action, the new Quick Action Generator or Mission Editor, they simply are user hostile, badly designed, and could be so much better. Worse, there is phenomenal community-created content available (which is great), even hosted by ED (a phenomenal chance). Getting it into DCS is an exercise in futility and bad UX. WTF does a player need to go to ED's web site, use a decades old, really bad web design and navigate to some content, then download and manually install the files? We live in past 2005! Discovering, contributing and managing content should all be integrated into DCS. After all, Unreal Tournament showed us in 1999 how it can be done, and 25 years later there is very little excuse why it's not done here. I hear that a lot, and unfortunately sometimes have to concur. The blame for this IMHO can't be squarely placed at ED, and I hope that if they improved their engagement with the community, that this can change. Community integration still seems underdeveloped as a discipline for ED - tbh, if you read "We do not have time to read through a 30 post thread of two people arguing why something is bad" as your welcome message, you know that there's room for improvement. There is. Which makes it so bewildering that so little effort is done to flatten the curve, or built in steps that make the curve more accessible. This does go against the grain of the more toxic "git gud" people of the community, and I still think it could help DCS become more popular. Again, a missed opportunity. If this is a common question (and I do NOT doubt that it is), there are a lot of things that can be done in DCS to alleviate such basic beginners pains. Just how difficult would it be to tell someone who tries to autostart the A-10A that, when it's not zero, the throttle MUST be set to zero, else the sequence would fail? And how difficult would it be to simply go the logical next step and make the experience better by simply starting the effing plane? When the user presses 'start engine' on the keyboard, their intent and desire is clear. Adding complexity (throttle must be zero) without reason is the realm of really bad design [and IMHO having to manually turn on bat power and EO is just adding insult to injury]. It just results in frustration from the players. I think that this is one of the biggest barriers to enter DCS, and many people fall into the 'it is sophisticated because it is complex' trap. The tutorials are bad. They are often written for the wrong audience, and, on top of that, badly executed. Some people think that because they are difficult they must be good. They aren't, they are just bad. If you, as an instructor, fail to get your point across, you fail as an instructor. Flying isn't difficult. DCS, unfortunately, often makes it unnecessarily difficult, and I hope - since I do love DCS and want to see it flourish - that this can be overcome soon.

Nothing.

Am I the only one who believes that the entire earth is a supremely bad idea? It would be a nice novelty for, say 5 minutes where you visit the place where you were born, perhaps drop a bomb on your elementary school - and then? "Entire Earth" means a homogenous data source - all map data is sourced from some large DB. So say goodbye to historic era maps (say, Normandy, Germany CW). Also say goodbye to all missions that you have created to date, as the entire earth map data is guaranteed to conflict with your mission. Take DCS Caucasus, for example, then overlay a real map. Notice how almost nothing lines up, and all your carefully aligned units must be re-positioned and given new orders. Oh, and many airfields no longer exist. I've taken the other (non-boom) flight sim that does use a global earth map to fly from Batumi to Kobuleti. Yeah, Kobuleti airfield, as in DCS no longer exists. Many landmarks will be different. Ok, so the maps now are more recent. That's IMHO good for any engagement that takes place around now plus/minus ten years. Anything else - not so much. So, lose any historic map, lose all your missions for the benefit of gaining access to some locations. Location IMHO doesn't make or break DCS. Missions do, the content that mission authors place inside a map. Without a good mission to drive engagement, even the most interesting map turns boring within an hour. You can only land so many times in Lukla before that novelty runs out. Oh, and visiting Merrill Meigs in Chicago is out - it's gone. As is Hong Kong's Kai Tak. So, yay! to the idea, and technical accomplishment. And nay!! to the (expectable) result - at least how it's available today from other vendors. Of course, I'll be happy to be proven wrong. Until I see different, I think we might be better served with a hand-tuned static map that may not have as much detail, but that has (paradoxically) better (more precise) detail/resolution. A quality over quantity thang.

Not to nit-pick -- can you be a bit more specific on the "more regular basis" bit?

Convinced me. Now stop talking, start chalking. My credit card needs action!

SOME ADDITIONAL NOTES FOR CLARIFICATION HIGH LEVEL OF GENERATOR ABSTRACTION Above describes the UI/UX for a (neophyte) player, to enable them to quickly generate a fun mission. The entire generator revolves around accessibility: it does not require the player to have specific knowledge about the era, area, aircraft or weapons and still be able to have an engaging mission. As such, the generator abstracts as much as possible, and uses accessible phrases and iconography and engaging UI to guide the player as much as possible; the results should be as forgiving for mistake as possible, and it should anticipate what the player may have intended, to have some fun. The generator's focus is on a fun experience, not an optimum of realism. To achieve this, the number of UI elements and choices is greatly reduced, and attributes that aren't strictly required are automatically fit for the mission by the generator. For example, setting the amount of fuel, chaff, flares etc are distractions that merely can confuse and do not significantly increase the experience or outcome. Therefore, this and similar settings (e.g., frequencies, gun ammo, flight formation) are abstracted and automatically filled by the generator. Similarly for enemy units, their AI, position etc - setting these up requires know-how of things that a new player may not have and lead to their frustration. It becomes a chore to provide, is unpleasant UX, and it is something that the generator can be much better at providing. Similarly, choosing Season, Time of day and weather can be abstracted into much easier terms that the player understands. Choosing "Dawn" as starting time does not require the player to know at what time the sun goes up on that map (Month), and that Winter on the Southern hemisphere is different from the Northern. Dawn means dawn, and the generator can sweat the details. It is this kind of smart player support that makes for an engaging interaction. THE GENERATOR MAKES OR BREAKS THIS APP! Providing many of the above 'nitty gritty' mission details (like enemy) the generator derives from the 'difficulty' attribute that the player sets on Panel 1. Abstracting so many different Attributes into a single setting will provide a challenge, and doing it well will decide the fate of the generator: since it is the generator's job to balance the mission, to make it a fun experience, not properly balancing a mission, not correctly anticipating what the player wants, not erring on the side of fun, and not being a fun experience can ruin the entire generator. Here is how I envision that this could work: Difficulty, together with the aircraft type that the player selects already yields an abundance of information: era, capabilities, potential enemies etc. We can use this with mission type to drive enemy unit selection, their number, placement, orders, alert status and AI settings. Examples: For example, the player does not have know which AAA are era era correct for his aircraft type, nor which of them are too lethal. Driven by the aircraft type and difficulty, the generator selects appropriate unit types and numbers for the mission type, and sets their alert status, skill level and how/when they activate (or if at all). For example, a difficulty setting of "Easy" can cause the generator to set all enemy units to ROE to "Weapons Hold", etc. Similarly, the difficulty attribute can control mission complexity for carrier ops: While "Easy" only has the player depart from the carrier, attack some hapless (weapons hold) unit on the shore and then proceed to a land-based airfield, a "Challenging" mission alters this so that the hapless unit now has teeth, some company, and the player has to return to the boat. This way, the generator can quickly automate mission generation without requiring the player to be confronted with settings that simply are too complex and ruin the experience. Note also that this UI (outside the theatre map) fully abstracts locality. The player is not required to place units nor their plane. This is done by the generator. It may be counter-intuitive at first, but not having to worry where the action takes place takes a lot of burden from the player, and also allows the generator to shine and keep generated missions fresh by leveraging map knowledge and always randomly picking the best locations for a particular mission type Mission generation The mission is generated after the player clicks on GO. Since there is no locality managed by the player (other than choosing the map/theater) loading and operating QAG is fast, and should on average only take a few seconds. QAG should retain settings between sessions, so subsequent sessions will be even faster (please see the note on Reuse below) Randomization This is an area where the generator can truly shine and leverage ED knowledge and experience. Each map has areas that are particularly well suited for certain engagement, and can show off the features of a map (for example, Caucasus can be drab in some places, while drop-dead beautiful in others). Picking the correct spot for a generated mission can make it an exponentially better experience. Since the generator places enemies and friends alike, it can randomize and optimize both at once and guarantee a steady stream of good experiences. Modularization, Templates (?) I suggest a heavily modularized approach to getting this version of QAG out of the door. Generation of mission types can be modularized (with planned missions already being mentioned in the Mission Type drop-down, but not yet available), as can be optimization for a particular map (leveraging/optimizing the beauty of a particular map can be a per map module that is added later). For example, an SAR mission type module can be added later. Since the generator picks the location of all action, it can also use an 'embellishment' module for 'eye candy' at the source and destination airfields, as well as the general location of the mission's action. This way, no matter which airfield is used, it can look good to the player and be era-compliant - the joys of automation. This embellishment module can be based on templates and be added later. I will not mention the potential monetization options.. ooops. API I strongly recommend that ED define and release the API for both QAG front-end and mission generator back-end so that the community can provide their own. The downslide here is that downloading and installing add-ons to DCS currently is not neophyte-friendly, so this will have to be a later development, when DCS's UX/UI matures sufficiently to integrate this. Reusability / Save / Retrieve / Exchange I'm assuming that the generator backend creates a '.miz' type mission as it does now, that is loaded into DCS like a standard mission created with Mission Editor, and that the output is compatible. If so, I strongly recommend that the generated missions are named sensibly (maybe ask the player) and are placed in a location where they can later be retrieved and re-played without having to re-generate them. I also strongly advise that QAG's GUI provide an interface to access and manage previously generated missions (it is trivial to store this version of QAG's settings within a .miz), so players can either replay a previously mission (if it was fun), or generate a new one based on the settings used (this was the origin of the 'Other' tab in the examples above. I merely chose to abstract that detail).

At this point in time it seems as if communications between ED and their supplied RB are significantly impeded. Details of the current situation are unknown to the public. Currently there seems to be even less support for the Harrier product (if that even seems possible). Since RB is the supplier for the Harrier, it seems prudent to assume that support from their side will be significantly reduced for the time being. How ED will/can support the Harrier remains to be seen. Currently, sales of that product have ceased.

It's not QAG, but if you want to fly your F4 in Caucasus, Germany or Syria, these missions should be able to scratch that itch (should it still be there) https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3345044/ https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3345094/ https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3345115/

After spending more time with QAG, I have some ideas and proposals to submit to the kind people at ED. I think that the proposed goals for QAG to serve as an easy, quick method to attract and keep engrossed new players is very difficult to accomplish with the current incarnation of QAG. Since I do want to be as constructive as possible, below please find an illustrated proposal how QAG can easier bridge the gap between a new player and having fun with DCS. Please be advised that the proposal is squarely aimed at new, or low-sophisticated users, and it's scope is limited to low-complexity missions. My goal was to pare down the UX/UI to a level that allows a quick mission creation, focused on a fun interaction. So, with that in mind... GOAL The aim of this GUI and underlying App is to provide a quick, simple interface and forgiving interface that results in simple, engaging non-repetitive missions for neophyte users of DCS. As such, it should guide the player through the process, always be tolerant of mistakes, and create missions that make sense from the perspective of the player (for example, if the players chooses to start an "Ground Attack" mission, and forgets to equip Air to ground weapons, there should at least be a warning, and the ability to go back to setting up th emission). This means that a lot of smart defaulting for values is required, and should a user change a setting that would require new defaulting of values that already were changed by the player, a warning will appear (for example, if the player has chosen a load-out for his aircraft, and changes the aircraft, a warning that this will void his previous load-out will appear. If they did not change the load-out, changing the aircraft will not bring up the warning) NOTE: the aim of this generator is ease of use, not generating a broad range of mission complexity. Complex missions are the realm of Mission Editor. This generator is aimed at QUICKLY generating FUN missions for new/inexperienced players, so the scope of the generated missions must be tightly controlled. It is NOT designed to generate any kind of mission imaginable, nor advanced, high-complexity missions (e.g. any mission requiring air-to-air refueling is well outside the generator's scope). The GUI is set up as a panel with several Tabs. Each tab is dedicated to an aspect of the mission. Values in each tab are defaulted intelligently to help guide the player, and they never overwrite values that have been changed by the player without prior warning and acceptance from the player. Currently two tabs (IMHO) suffice to set up this QAG, the images below propose a third (as to yet undefined) tab "Other" that is not required. It's just how I work, please bear with me. NOTE Any edit on any tab should support AT LEAST ONE LEVEL OF UNDO NOTE All generated missions should be saved to a folder and be instantly recallable by players so they can be shared and modified. THE MISSION TAB MAP Pop-Up Allows selection of map. Only maps owned by the player are enabled, while all maps are shown (a map that isn't owned by the player is greyed out, and still visible so the player knows what maps are available should they purchase them. A later iteration of the map should allow the player to go to the store to purchase the map now). A low-res rendition of the map is show (perhaps taken from the relevant map folder). Notes: No Country selection, player is always Combined joint blue, enemy is always red. Defaults to Caucasus or whatever last used Note: No map is actually loaded, as the entire QAG UX does not support locality. This level of complexity is not necessary for new players. Implementation-dependent, a map may have to be loaded during the actual mission generation MISSION TYPE A Clear-Text selection of SIMPLE TO UNDERSTAND mission types that define the parameters of the mission. For example "Attack Ground Vehicles" defines a mission where the player is expected to attack ground vehicles with their aircraft. Note that the type of mission does NOT prejudice the aircraft in any way, so any mission type can be chosen for any aircraft, even if that does not make sense from an expert's mind. It's the challenge for the app to make this engaging, not a task for the player to know enough about their plane and it's capabilities. If, for example, the player has chosen 'Carrier Operations' as mission type, and an A-10A as aircraft, there should be a warning that the A-10 isn't carrier capable, and if th emission starts, the A-10 is put into the air above the carrier, with the same goals as a carrier capable aircraft would have. The player will then have to decide how to proceed. But the generator will let the player do what they want. The generator is also smart to utilize the resources owned by the player: if the player chooses a warbird for a 'search and destroy' mission and owns the WWII asset pack, the gen automatically also includes objects/enemies from that pack; if the player chooses 'carrier ops' as mission type and owns SC, SC resources are prioritized over standard DCS carriers etc. Defaults to Ferry or whatever last used Examples Ferry / Transport - fly an aircraft from A to B. Distance and other obstacles are determined by difficulty. Escort / Formation - An escort type mission where the player is to fly close/accompany another aircraft(s). Difficulty determines dissimilarity and number of changes that the flight path of the other planes have. Attack Ground Vehicles - Attack a number of ground vehicles at a location. Which and number of vehicles are determined by difficulty Attack Installation - Attack and destroy a building, installation or bridge at some map coordinates. Difficulty controls how well it is defended Air Combat - engage enemy aircraft. Which aircraft and number of enemies is determined by difficulty Attack Ships - attack ships. Which ships and number determined by difficulty Carrier Operations - launch from the carrier and (depending on difficulty), some other goals. If player owns the SC module, the generator automatically uses SC units, standard DCS (Stennis) units else. The generator should be smart in these things, Attack Air Defenses -Attack Air defenses. Difficulty determines type and number. Air Patrol - Defend an airspace from enemy aircraft ("CAP") Search And Destroy - Look for, and destroy, ground vehicles in an area. The gen's "secret sauce" can shine here - if ac type is a helo, the area can be smaller and more rugged, if it's an attack plane there can be heavy armor, if it's a fast mover some lightly armed vehicles etc. And of course, the gen guarantees that all targets are era-compliant (or older) with player's aircraft, so we don't need to set that. Be smart about the data we have. (SAR - later) DIFFICULTY The magic dust in this mission generator, a catch-all to hide complexity. In general it is used to determine the number, skill level and lethality of the enemy in relation to the player's aircraft. On lower levels, this should be conservative: For example, if the player's aircraft is an A-10 and mission type is "Air combat", the gen only uses planes that match the A-10's capabilities or less, for example another A-10, or perhaps some less capable helicopters. Making this work well, balancing the mission well though this diffuse parameter will be the make-or-break feature of this generator, so place utmost attention to the design and balancing of this attribute. Defaults to Easy or whatever last used. Choices could be "Easy - Fun - Normal - Challenging - Hard - Deadly" Difficulty is never explained. It just is. It's the magic of the game. SEASON Time of year, usually only affects the map (and perhaps air temperature). Defaults to Any owlu Choices are "Any (random) - Spring - Summer - Autumn - Winter" TIME OF DAY Choices "Any (random" - Dawn (shortly after sunup" - Mid-Day - Dusk (shortly before sundown) - Night" Defaults to Dawn owlu WEATHER Only a few choices here to simplify settings Choices "Good - Cloudy - Bad" -- with wind picking up progressively, as does precipitation and fog. "Good" translates to little wind, Clear to scattered, "Cloudy" to mid wind and Overcast etc. Note: "Difficulty does not affect Season nor weather" Defaults to "Good" owlu START Where the aircraft starts from. For some missions (e.g. Air Combat) 'In Air' is preferrable, and a warning should be shown if something else is chosen, but it should not be prevented. Choices: Runway (from the runway of an airfield that the gen chooses sufficiently close to the action) Tarmac/Hangar COLD & DARK (airfield that the gen chooses sufficiently close to the action) Tarmac/Hangar Started up (airfield that the gen chooses sufficiently close to the action) In Air close to Action DESCRIPTION A brief narration of ALL current settings (including those from other tabs), what the player should expect should they press GO now GO Start the mission with current settings now. Before the mission is started, a number of consistency checks are run. All checks that fail are collected and presented as a list to the player (e.g. "The A-10A is not suitable for carrier operations", with the player being able to choose between "Proceed anyway" or "Go Back" to change some offending settings. Note: player has no control over locality of neither their plane nor the enemy, this is al decided by the generator to keep complexity for the player down. MY PLANE TAB This controls the player's loadout and number of aircraft in wing. Note that the loadout should be intelligently defaulted when the player changes mission type UNLESS THE PLAYER HAS CHANGED THE LOADOUT, in which case the player has the ability to decline defaulting via a dialog. If the player changes the aircraft type, and they already have changed the loadout, allow the player to not change the aircraft. Note that since the App should support at least one level of UNDO, this is merely interface chrome. When a new aircraft type is chosen, the best possible loadout is chosen for the particular mission type. AIRCRAFT A pop-up menu of player-controllable aircraft types. It should list all aircraft modules that are potentially purchasable, with those that aren't currently owned by the player disabled (note that in future versions there could be the option of players linking directly to the store to purchase the module). If a type is well suited for the currently chosen mission type, the type name is preceded by a diamond (and/or in boldface letters, and the background may be dark green although if used exclusively, color-coding fails for some color-blind people), to indicate mission suitability. If a type is unfit for the current mission type (e.g. A-10A for carrier missions), the type name is preceded by a skull (or similarly discouraging) symbol, and the background may be red (exclusively color-coding is a bad UX decision because of potentially color-blind players). NUMBER OF AIRCRAFT IN WING: A pop-up menu for the number of aircraft (all same type) in wing. Choices are 1 (player only) to 4 (player, plus three AI). AI skill level is defined by difficulty (panel I), and should always be Veteran or above. Loadout of all aircraft is identical to player. UNDER-WING Boxes 1..N LEFT-Clicking into this box brings up the loadout selection. The DCS drop-down menu isn't all that bad, it's just not neophyte friendly. A better, more elaborate, neophyte-friendly per-item description would be helpful (e.g. instead of "LAU 105 with 1xAIM 9L Sidewinder IR AAM" we would use "AIM 9L Sidewinder ("Heat Seeker") Missile" A click and drag interface window that open as and allows players to drag the possible armament from a selection (with good description, to allow players to differentiate a short-range Heat-Seeker Sidewinder from a radar-controlled mid-range "Slammer") to that station would be MUCH better and should be implemented in a later release NOTE: There is no interface for Fuel, Gun ammo, chaffs, flares, formation etc. It always defaults to the best (most logical) values for the chosen mission. GET BEST LOADOUT (Button) Button to load the best loadout for all station for the particular mission that is currently selected. LIVERY (OPTIONAL, CLUTTERS INTERFACE, LITTLE BENEFIT) Pop-up for all available liveries for this type. DESCRIPTION A brief narration of ALL current settings (including those from other tabs), what the player should expect should they press GO now GO Start the mission with current settings now. Before the mission is started, a number of consistency checks are run. All checks that fail are collected and presented as a list to the player (e.g. "The A-10A is not suitable for carrier operations", with the player being able to choose between "Proceed anyway" or "Go Back" to change some offending settings. "OTHER" TAB Not required, we already have enough info to auto-generate a fun and engaging mission.

It's not one percent as epic as you may think it is. I've written a mission that can do that - simply replace the Parachutists with a CA-capable infantry guy (currently some igla carrying dude). Walking around on the ground isn't really exciting, and DCS's visuals aren't inspiring at that altitude. Then, you'll realize that the same guy who can snipe you flying a Falcon from the ground with their AK can also snipe your igla-carrying butt from across a hill, and the fun levels go down significantly. Then, when you have found a hiding spot, call for extraction, and watch paint dry or the grass grow for 45 minutes while the chopper is inbound. Hop aboard, and wait another 45 minutes during RTB. The excitement never ceases. After your first try, you'll never want to come back. The idea does sound exciting. Current execution limits keep it lukewarm at best.

Indeed. I feel that there are currently two main avenues that ED should pursue to help people like and retain DCS: first, getting people into DCS and not scare them off. Currently, to me so many things in DCS scream "go away" instead of being welcoming. Setup, understanding what fits together how, getting into the cockpit for the first time, actually doing something fun. So many things seem like a chore, and people are left to their own devices to find out what to do, in one of the worst possible UX. So step one would be significantly improving DCS's accessibility. Second, keep them in DCS, keep them interested and occupied. There simply isn't much to do except learn a plane. Using really, really bad tutorial missions. The Quick Action Generator may one day fill part of that need, currently it's not there - IMHO by a long shot. Mission Editor isn't for the casual user, and can't really be used by a neophyte to quickly create a fun and engaging mission. Discovering User Created content at ED User Files is a trip to the bad old days of 1995's way of doing web stuff. Really bad. Getting good content into DCS that way, and keeping it current is not a good experience, even though there is a ton of great content available. This should be integrated into the main game (and publishing/updating content should be integrated into Mission Editor). So, step two is creating, discovering, sharing and keeping current content much easier

Oh, goodie. Another DCS 'speciality'. Thank you. I'm trying some more code hardening, please see below. This really should not happen, and it seems that ED is completely redesigning their Event manager without much care for existing code. playerScore.lua

Update 20250611 - Show runway length I took @buceador's advice and now include the length of the longest runway in the target airfield choice menu and description text of your goal. I'm trying to control feature creep, so thank you to all who are suggesting further enhancements, please bear with me if I do not immediately respond or add a feature to "Free Flight". The other Free Flight missions have received the same features. Cheers, -ch

Update 20250611 - Show runway length In line with the other "Ferry Flight" missions

Update 20250611 - Show runway length In line with the other "Ferry Flight" missions

I think you can broaden your mind if you allow for things to maybe be true even if you haven't seen something or deem it inconceivable. As I write this, more than 50'000 people are online in a combat flight sim (it's currently ranked at 15 in today's (Jun 10 2025) Steam daily online stats. There is lots of potential. It may not be your cup of tea, and please try to accept that this market does exist, even if you don't like it. Just imagine how great DCS could become if just 1 in every ten if those people would come online for DCS. They would need different content for sure. Better online support, the works. I just checked. there were <500 people online in DCS now. I think interest is there. DCS is potentially a great product. I'd be happy to create missions for the non-hardcore CFS crowd that currently flock to the Big One and crave for something more. Only 1 in 10. Sounds doable to me. But I need the tools, and something to work with.

With the advent of Foothold and similar sandboxes, this is no longer true; it is indeed a content issue, and classic, multi-hour engagements are only enjoyable for a small section of players, while MP sandbox play can attract a much greater variety of players. If DCS added more and better support for this inside its scripting environment (there is a lot of untapped potential here: more/better support for C/SAR, Transport, Logistics, better scripting for fuel, unit damage and drone control, etc), mission creators can cater to that need, and the MP community can grow hopefully disproportionally. A typical Foothold session lasts 45 minutes, which is still long in MP circles but significantly easier to swallow than 1 hour briefings followed by 3 hour missions that can't be interrupted. And yes, even with Foothold-style missions, real save and continue is a must in MP, hopefully it will arrive some day. Let's hope that content creators soon receive better, and more flexible tools that can help creating more popular MP missions.

That is indeed good news, thank you BN. That being said, I don't see the numbers (I am hosting 2 servers through the kind people at Fox3). So if (as I'm hoping) you are phenomenally successful at SP, with steadily increasing player numbers, keeping online players steady does mean a relative decline. I dearly hope that on-line play picks up soon. If not, I will at least retire one of my hosted servers. To increase on-line play I'd love to see a better, tighter integration into the main game, and a massive upgrade of the UX/UI. I have already posted many suggestions in this regards, and I'm sure that you have forwarded some of them to the team. Here's to great DCS success - online and SP.

I seem to recall a post by some ED people citing a 10%-12% online figure, probably 1-2 years ago. Given DCS's atrocious online experience (compared to other games that allow online play), that is hardly surprising to me. On-line play does seem to be in decline for DCS, even though some companies (e.g. Fox3) have taken much of the pain of hosting DCS out of the equation (I'm publicly hosting 2 DCS servers for the community). In the context of this thread, all this IMHO is immaterial, though. OP suggests adding some air frame and maps to make DCS more beginner-friendly, a non-sequitur in my mind. In my mind, it's neither the planes nor maps that make DCS inaccessible to neophytes.

Beneficial in what way? The title reads "beginner-friendly", the contents focus on WW II aircraft, which are decidedly not beginner friendly to fly. And that makes DCS more beginner-friendly because...? Also, keep in mind that in DCS, we look at geological timescales for new aircraft - "several" aircraft equates to 10 years+ Uh. Normandy and Channel are dead last when it comes to players, at least on servers. Last week-end I counted 3 players total for Normandy and Channel (ok, dead last is Falklands with 0, and 1 for Iraq. I consider both maps dead, along with "Halfghanistan"). So how is creating a worse version from one of the most unpopular maps (by server player count) going to make DCS more beginner-friendly? So those "several WWII aircraft" you talked about were full fi? ED wants to make money. Iconic planes make money: Hornet, Tomcat, Fat Amy. The others - not so much. Creating several warbirds in lo- and hi-fi? Unlikely to the extreme to become funded. And it's still a mystery how adding aircraft - any type - makes DCS more beginner friendly. Making DCS more beginner friendly IMHO would be things like A UX/UI that is usable Make it easy to view and get into your aircraft, and especially reduce the pain to configure your hardware for your aircraft Provide some decent tutorials Make it easy to create a quick engagement (the new QAG isn't there yet. Not by a long shot) Make it easy to create missions (Mission Editor really isn't there yet, not by a couple of light years) Make it easy to discover (find, download, manage/update, remove) new content, especially user-created content like missions, liveries, mods Much better improved multiplayer support: find who is online, join them, invite them etc, create groups, arrange meetings etc. There are tons of things to improve DCS's decidedly callous approach to welcoming new players. Adding new planes or maps seems not to be among them for me.

As an avid fan of the map, and born and bred Hamburger, here are some things that are absolute no-gos to me, and probably definite "who gives a flying f*ç%" to anyone else. since none of this is phase 2 Bunker Feldstrasse (see here) Köhlbrandbrücke Euler-Hermes Hochhaus (here) Planetarium (here) Also, this may be an edge case, and it's only an issue for those who parse the 'radio' file: please include western airbase callsigns, using eastern callsigns for airfields with german names (e.g. Allsted) throws a spanner into airfield matching and retrieving frequencies (see here) The Elbe-Seitenkanal is interrupted northeast of Lüneburg, where the Schiffshebewerk (boat lift) would be.null Please keep up the great work!

Version 20250611 Download here (ED User Files) Do you know that feeling? When you can't be bothered, and you just want to FLY! This mission scratches that itch. Any plane, anywhere, hot or cold, any livery. Just jump into that cockpit and take off into the wild blue yonder. Fly that aircraft from one location to another and have a blast. Switch to any other plane that you own at a moment's notice. Enjoy yourself! And if you *can* be bothered, this mission can suggest some location to fly to, and maybe even navigate to a beacon on the way. Of course it allows you to choose any airfield on the map as destination. And yeah, the mission will look up frequencies and other stuff for you. Because it knows that you can't be bothered otherwise, and you simply want to have fun. Supports all helicopter bases. This mission is so simple and so much fun, I'm surprised that I had to create it. So here it is - slightly embellished with some bells and whistles like civil air traffic, fog, etc. to keep you interested. For example, it now keeps book of your achievements, per type and a total: If enabled, your achievements are persisted, and shared with "Ferry Germany" and "Ferry Caucasus" (if you have them). IMPORTANT NOTE: Due to the way that DCS works, this mission can only grant access to all your aircraft if it is run as "multiplayer" even if you are flying all alone. That "Freebie Plane"? It's only there to mock you in single player. So, press "LAUNCH MULTIPLAYER SERVER" to start this mission for real, join BLUE, and then click on DYNAMIC SLOTS to gain access to ALL airfields, stocked with ALL aircraft that you own. ANOTHER NOTE: To allow Ferry to save and share your accomplishments with other Ferry missions, you must de-sanitize DCS And of course, the mission does support multiplayer.

If a unit U is stopped on the deck of a carrier C, they will stay in the same relative location to each other over time. In other words, if you subtract the location of U from C, that difference will remain the same over time since their movement in the world is the same. So all you need to do is subtract one from the other, keep the values, and if they are the same for a time (say, 10 seconds), and unit U is not inAir, and their difference (distance) is less than say 200 meters, U is stopped on the deck of C. So you'd need to take two measurements, and remember the first. But the math is simple and straightforward.

Tell that to the people who designed the Phone in 2006 when the mobile phone market was already 10 years old and considered 'mature'. I think that the computer entertainment market is still in its infancy, and there is a lot of dynamics to be observed: the way we purchase, consume and contribute content, how content is presented, the way how people interact. and of course the sheer performance available to us. I'm enthusiastic about the future, and I hope DCS will be with us for a long time to come. It's a bit disappointing to see how slow the established marques (amongst them DCS) move, and I think that the future might well belong to the more nimble competitors. Unless there are seismic shifts in the way that DCS operates, I think that there is a good chance that another company swoops in. In German we say 'the better is the enemy of the good'. Let's see what better things become available

I always assumed that was because laundry services returned our cleaned uniforms on Saturdays. Well at least at my barracks they did..