jubuttib

I don't think you can download the mod yet?

Would likely be a lot cheaper these days, with UE5, to make the map, but I have heard of even just individual point to point tracks in the tens of km range being six figures. Of course depends on how much in the way of custom assets is required, what sort of fidelity overall, how many people you're paying for and how much, etc. etc. 50x50 km map would be a LOT. Think of it this way: ArmA 3's Altis is afaik 270 km^2, which is about 16.5x16.5 km or so. GTA V map is 80 km^2. Largest Assassin's Creed map is from Odyssey, at 256 km^2, including a lot of sea. NFS Unbound is ~50 km^2. Forza Horizon 5 is 108 km^2. 50x50 km is 2 500 km^2. Only games like Test Drive Unlimited, The Crew and FUEL have come close to that kind of thing, and all with big caveats. I feel like the only reasonable way to do it on an achievable budget would be relying almost purely on procedural generation.

Gotta ask, which warhead are we talking about? The RPG-7 has been capable of launching a bunch of different warheads, and they've varied in effectiveness over time. There's at least the PG-7V, VM, VS, VS1, VL and VR that came out between the 60s to late 80s period, with penetrations ranging from 10 inches to over 20 inches of RHA.

I mean sure, in the end it's possible to even combine completely different game engines to work in the same "battlefield" by using a separate layer of software to act as communications between them. This is how militaries might run MCS, VBS and Steel Beasts Pro simultaneously in the same mission, each "game" takes care of its own thing, and communicates the necessary bits to the others so that they can render what they need from them. But then you're also basically making two separate games, which isn't cheap either. It's not impossible by any means, there are many ways you could go about it, but all of them need pretty big investments to get the kind of quality expected in each genre, and open-world or large point to point tracks can (depending on what exactly the surroundings are) be the most expensive kind of tracks to develop for a racing game (since it's not a loop, it tends to cover a larger area, need more terrain and asset work, etc. etc.).

For me the bigger problem is that we're missing anti-tank troops with actually effective weapons. Though an RPG-7, especially with the better warheads like the tandem ones, should still be pretty deadly when used right.

Helicopters can be notoriously hard to kill in DCS. A while back (last year?) I tested the Black Shark 3 against an AI Ka-27, and it took 3 IGLAs + a bunch of Vikhrs to actually down it...

Yup, I actually work in racing sims, and it would indeed be very expensive. The graphical detail demands on low level and high level don't overlap too much (one is focused on what's next to the road, so a lot of stuff can be handwaved away because it's obscured, the other needs stuff to exist but usually how it looks from 1 meter off the deck isn't AS important, etc.), so you'd just need to have everything at a pretty high level, and at a big scale at the same time. Would be quite demanding on hardware too.

You watched Top Gear? Remember that episode where Clarkson took a white Mitsubishi Evo against the British army? Ben Collins, who did the actual driving for the video, talks about shooting that in his book. The heli pilot they had was Q, aka Quentin Smith, and Collins just remembers being absolute gobsmacked by Q flying in a Robinson, down a forest road, between the trees, backwards, at over 100 km/h, filming the Evo. EDIT: Some more inspiration.

Hah, awesome job man, really fun video. Those rally helicopter pilots are nutjobs.

Hmmm, interesting, kinda wondering how that plays together with unsprung pedals, where pedal trim must be off.

Heya Kinkku (was surprised to hear you weren't speaking rally English when I heard you in an interview...), just thought I'd ask about a thing mentioned in the UH-60L manual. In the manual it is said "This aircraft was fitted with FLIR and terrain radar which are not possible to implement in a DCS mod." This got me curious, because at one point the guy making the A-29 Super Tucano mod did manage to finagle a working FLIR into a DCS community mod. Has the way this was achieved been patched out since then?

Would be interesting to hear from your experiences if you go that way. Last I heard the aftermarket damper wasn't very strong, or adjustable, so I kind of doubt it's strong enough to get a deadstick setup. But I do not know.

I wasn't looking into your private life, I was just surprised to see someone put work above life in their list of priorities. And I did say in the first message that "I guess this is kinda neither here nor there in this thread tho..." So yeah we can end it there.

Wasn't quite as thorough as I should have been properly: What I was saying is that you put work above life in your list (and below family), so I was wondering if in a hypothetical case where your work was ruining your life, would you prioritize work over life? Since work > life in your list. I wasn't implying that work is actively ruining your life or anything, just that if it were, would it still be priotitized.

Wait, so if work is ruining your life, you'll prioritize work? I guess this is kinda neither here nor there in this thread tho...

FWIW, when using and external flight model, what DCS is built to simulate kinda stops mattering (based on what ASC head said, and other discussions about EFMs).

OK, second question: Why the biggest 500 kg one instead of the 250 kg one? Regardless, fun stuff, thanks! EDIT: And there is the GBU-39B/B, which has the option for terminal laser guidance...

That's an odd change, why not the LS-6-100, which is more of an SDB equivalent?

I mean, technically you can, it's your SDK, you could make it opensource if you wanted to (unless part of it is using licensed closed source stuff I guess, or something similar). But of course you don't want to, which is entirely understandable.

The Mi-8 is great, but it's smål. Tiny. Need big ups! Mi-26 is mandatory. Ka-27/29 is indeed just a perversion of mine, I like coax-contrarotating helis. In a month! I get Christmas, but do people take such a big false start for Easter?

Some of the European ones would be fun, though I have this perverse desire to get the Ka-27 (or 29)... Or of course the Mi-26, because we need big lift.

In theory I love this, but I'm not sure I've seen a single time a dev (1st or 3rd party) that has said "year 20XX" and it's actually been that year for release... I really hope you didn't just jinx it. Regardless, I am really looking forward to the Bo-105!

Cheers!

Oh yeah I do intend to back up! I am a datahoarder anyway, but I'm also a game developer, and have learned that sometimes the nuclear option is the best option. I'm almost 100% certain it's not the controllers, because as I said all the inputs (push buttons, encoders, etc.) work perfectly fine in MSFS, Windows test screen, VKB test software, etc. It's only DCS that has issues, and even there they work in the controls screen just fine. I do have the quaggles controls injection mod installed (I consider it mandatory for most modules honestly), so might be that over time something with how that has been updated and how it interacts with the game has gone awry.

FWIW the issues with these buttons and encoders persist in other planes too, it's not just the Viggen. Hence why I'm considering nuking everything.