FlankerKiller

+1

I doubt Razbam will do it, but who knows. There is a lot of late cold war era "blue force" jets in the pipeline ATM, and a big wish for more "red force" jets. The nice thing about the late cold war is its "red force" can actually be simulated. We already have the Mig-21, and the Mi-24. The Mig-23 is still planed, and there are rumors of a Mig-29A. A Mig-27K would give some serious ground attack capability to the reds. Personally I would prefer an SU-22, but I would still buy a Mig-27 on day one. So maybe someone will do it. There is a market of late cold war Russian jets. Maybe some new studio will come in an fill it. Or maybe ED will decide it's easy money, which it is, and fill it themselves. The Mig-27 would be a good start. "I'd love to see the EM charts to know for sure. Anyway it would be awesome" My understanding is they simplified the intake and exhaust, since it isn't as concerned about performance at high altitude.

+1 from me Korea would be a great era to simulate. And as you said alot of it is done already. Just need the map, and some late WWII Soviet era assets.

I don't believe the UH-1H we have is a Vietnam era Huey. It has carbon fiber rotor blades after all. But I would love to see it with an RWR, and the ability to mount an M2 in the door gun. Pulse as you pointed out extra ammo should be an option. It never carried the 40MM grenade turret wich is disappointing. Really thought want is needed is a better logistics engine so we can better model the support of ground troops. That I believe would breath new life back into the Huey in DCS.

That's good for you, but not everyone has hundreds of dollars just lying around to buy DCS modules. And the Apache is going to be one hell of a popular module. It's going to bring things to DCS that it doesn't currently have, a d it's the first western attack helicopter in game. While it will be cool the F-15E brings nothing new. Any mission it can fly can also be flown by the F-18, or the F-16. So for someone choosing they may very well choose the Apache especially if they own one of the fourth generation jets. Razbam know this. I believe it would be wise to let the hybe die down a bit after the Apache release then release the F-15E. Also I suspect they plan to release it in a pretty polished state. That takes time and testing. It took HB five years to get the Tomcat out on the market. A d the F-15E is a much much more complicated jet. But I bet when it dose finally release it's going to be amazing.

Should be about two more weeks. Lol. If there smart they won't release it within six months of the Apache. At least I wouldn't.

The only real handicap that the KA-50 had in daylight operations is the lack of RWR. It seems odd that it was left out.

Or better yet multiple versions. With the clear nose, and the gun ship nose. Honestly I believe the B-25 is the best fit for a bomber in DCS. It could be used with the maps we have, and especially will have soon. And it was used against more tactical targets, troop encampments, railroad yards, supply depots, fuel storage areas, and airbases. With multi crew, AI crew members, and AI gunners all being a thing now, the time is right.

I'm glad I'm not the only one with this problem

+1

+1 on everything. DCS needs better ground AI way more then it needs any new assets.

I agree we need more infantry types. The foundation is already in game we just need more assets. With DCS coming back around to being a close air support game it's time the ground forces got a real upgrade. Infantry combat is still the majority of combat, and needs to be represented better in game. It seem the easiest way to start would be to have more type added to all armies. With light machine guns, anti tank rockets, grenade launchers, and MANPADS the infantry would have some real teeth, just as they do IRL. Having a really good verity of ground troops would give us a reason to get in close with the attack helicopters.

I love the idea of ground launch Cruse missiles. Not only can they be fired at targets on our side of the map. They can be intercepted by us. It's already kinda fun to work with a AWCS and defend an area from sea or air launched Cruse missiles. Having a ground unit that can sling them would be a fun way to give out fighters something more to do.

I know that people are eagerly looking forward to this, and some people I'm sure want it now. But those are the same people who will complain if it isn't as complete as they want it on day one. So please take the time. Nessasry and make it right. I for one am sure I'll be flying this thing for many many years to come. And I for one can wait a few more months if nessasry to get a good first impression.

As the title says. Can we get an immune to weapons setting. Similar to the Immortal setting, but only for weapons. So you can still break the aircraft, and still crash. But weapons won't hurt you.

Exactly what the title says. I know they did this, kinda, with the Hip so it's doable. Actually I've been editing these files for years so I know it's definitely doable. But unlike the hip let us choose. Let it go all the way from zero to one eighty. I personally fly with a sixty max and if I've edited it a forty five min. I feel like this most accurately represents the human eyes zoom for me. But literally every one is different. And it's a pain to set your zoom level at the beginning of missions. And then not be able to touch it.

+1.

Absolutely would love this. Get some old school AG going.

Surely it will, and I'm sure it has. From the Back Shark to the A-10 was two years. Then it was another few years until DCS world. Then still over a year till the P-51. Then in 2018 it just kinda exploded. New maps, big game improvements, new modules, new assets. So the resources do seem to increase with time and success. But recreateing something like the Parry class from dangerous waters in DCS would take so much new work, and require such a huge overhaul of the existing navel assets that it probably wouldn't be viable at this time. That being said Eagle Dynamics I would Pay $150 today for a full fidelity Parry, and $200 for the Burk with the ASW features added. It would be awesome to be the real fleet defender. But it's at least a decade away.

I see a lot of good ideas in this thread. Honestly I too dream of having the Dangerous Waters experience in DCS, and I'm pretty sure ED dose as well. But there are limits and resources are finite. Before we go crazy with new units we need to have all the current units brought up to the same standard. Then we need some kind of AI in the ships. Something with offensive and defensive capability. Ships need to set there own attack courses, have some basic tactics, turn to expose defensive weapons, and carriers turn into the wind for launch and recovery. Maybe even have them run if out matched. This would go miles to making the navel side of DCS more immersive. As for player control, I would make some kind of fleet commander game and link it to the Super Carrier. Set up an RTS game type interface that is optimized for the navel ops. This would also allow additional features to be implemented as they are developed. Such as ASW such a setup could be really engaging to play once the dynamic campaign becomes a thing. And since you can dive into a naval unit, AKA The Hornet you already have that first person aspect baked in.

Current for sure. We need to be able to make that spy ship drift into hostile water.

Also they're about to make a fortune with the Apache. Thay would be be better served by putting the finishing touches on the Viper and Hornet, working on core features, and getting the Hind, Mosquito, Apache put of early access. This community is not really looking for a string of half finished products, and ED knows that. Plus these modules take a long ass time to make. A big reveal every two years or so is actually really good pace.

Hmm, we're getting a huge module with Apache. We got a huge module with the Hind. So I'm going to go on a limb and say there's no new modules coming in 2022. Except maybe something in the world war II theater. Mmm, let's see what would I be working on if I was Eagle Dynamics. *Fully dynamic weather system with the new clouds. *New airfield ATC with overhead approaches, straight and approaches, and holding pattern. *Multi core utilization. *New AI behaviors improving close-range air to air combat, and AI air to ground combat. *Obviously the new AI flight model *Lots of new ground assets, technicals, light armored vehicles, new infantry. *Improved SAM AI allowing for proper IADS behavior. *Animated ground crew. *New ground vehicle damage model, allowing for mobility kills, and turnt kills. *New naval unit AI allowing ships to maneuver to engage, and maneuver for defense.

I definitely disagree with the second half of this. While a different variant does require work, some new cockpit layouts, new systems modeled, or systems deleted, and in some cases even the inclusions of new weapons. It's not like they're starting from scratch. When you pay full price for a module, you're paying for that module being developed from nothing. A different variant of an airframe is going to have a tremendous amount of work already done 3D modeling, systems modeling, often engine modeling, weapons modeling, and very importantly flight modeling. Yes there will often be changes, but those are changes to something that is existing. 80s charging $20 to upgrade from the a10c to the A10-c2 is a pretty good example of the financial burden that accompany would be expecting from such an upgrade. I think 20 to $30 in today's money would be reasonable for new variants of the same aircraft. It would also give makers of an aircraft an opportunity to continue bringing in revenue. I actually don't like Hitler's model on this. What if you are not interested in the f-14a. Or the Iranian model. Or the B model for that matter. You still got stuck with the pricing for all of it. But it would be unfair to the consumer to charge full price for each individual variant that is developed. When the foundation will already have been laid. Just my two cents. I do believe we are coming to a Time when different variants of aircraft are going to be expected and going to be the norm. I also believe it is unfair to ask a developer to develop several variants of an aircraft for initial release. I also think that that is unfair to the consumers who may not be interested in each and every variant of each and every aircraft. But I do believe we're significant different exist, that the market will support multiple variants of the same airframe. Early, middle, late being a good example. Or in the case of the F4 definitely a naval and land base variant. Actually the F4 needs an early, a middle, and a late of both navel and land-based. At least an early and late. Which is great for the developer. Because they get to sell multiple projects without having to develop each one from scratch.

ED, please consider making the A-10A a full fidelity module. You have an opportunity to have the full career of the A-10 simulated with an early, mid, and late variants. This would also be a good time to set the standard for pricing different versions of the same aircraft. You already started this with the A-10C II upgrade. The A model was the real tank killer as it was used in it's intended role in Desert Storm. It would give those of us that enjoy the late cold war another Jet to fly. But more importantly it would give those of us that love this iconic aircraft a chance to experience it's evolution, and how each change affected It war fighting capability. Also it would open the door to you fleecing our wallets for many many more years to come, and my wallet wants to be fleeced.