musolo
-
Posts
475 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by musolo
-
What is your primary module?
-
Obviously i was asking about modern red jets))) This whole topic and its arguments are about modern jets. And you bringing up cold war stuff)
-
So what do you suggest then? I`m repeating my question.
-
Oh i see. Well if you know any ED product were those classified jets would sit well. Perhaps better than in CA. If you have better way than proposed in this topic to implement some of those modern planes, given that docks are not available for them. i`d love to hear that.
-
The argument is that low fidelity modules are a waste of development time, for a product aimed at producing high fidelity modules. Question was not ment for you man) But tell me what is DCS Ground Crew tag means? Are you a developer?
-
You sure sound pretty convinced to me. That is pretty convinced statement. Well this "my way or no way" approach won`t get you anywhere. You know better than i do that it won`t ever happen your way. It`s not possible your way. As much as i would like it to be your way it won`t help. So it`s kind of a futile gesture. And counterproductive attitude. So far i`ve red all kinds of your arguments against my suggestions. Fine. Let`s hear yours. You gotta have some right? Otherwise your mindset is non different of yet another gatekeeper.
-
Well the game isn`t going any direction now nor my way neither your way. And again i remind you of single main condition for ny playable module for MAC is the presence of docks. And for that reason there is no way we`ll ever see anything in MAC that doesn`t exist in DCS.
-
Due that docks factor nothing classified will be in MAC. As for cold war era modules there isn`t any issuie of classified nature to get in the way. So no problem there.
-
Few things to remind so that we won`t keep making false assumptions Let`s make one thing clear here. Every single module in MAC is developed with access to the docks to begin with. It`s there to just simplify and minimize pilot`s workload of the FF modules to FC3 level. So developement of the new modules for MAC will happen based on the availibility of the docks. No docks - no MAC module.
-
Me too man but let`s face it`s not gonna happen.
-
You don`t want CA to expand the way it is right now i get it. Fine - just don`t buy whatever you don`t like. And i do the same. I mean that`s what we all do here. We buy and fly what we like. As for your AI arguments i have a question. Would it make any difference to you if you got splashed by Ace level AI that bypass any of the clicking and instruments manipulations human would have to do or me sitting in its flyable variant?
-
I`m a 3d genealist myself and that gives me more or less approximate estimation quantifying it. And yes it would take couple hundreds of man hours for modeling, unwrapping, texturing rigging and animating rigged geomery. Plus another couple hundred hours of MFD,s and HUD UI. drawing and animating. Given half ot the cockpit interior is allready made and can be used there. And perhaps same amount of time for coding. that totals to 600 man hours put into such module give or take couple of hundreds more. it is still orders of magnitude less than Full Fidelity module development would take. And at the third/quarter of the price of FF module and at least ten times cheaper to produce it is still very economically attractive undertaking. Considering the acute shortage and high demand all that amounts to a very bright future for those jets as a separate Combat Arms niche products.
-
1) CA is indeed a separate product with lesser fidelity units that didn`t require complete documentation to be implemented in it. That`s the whole point. To expand on this approach. Concenrated at ground units obviously atm. But it is a commander`s enviroment too. With ability to play ground units if you wish to that is. And there is nothing wrong in expanding it`s playable units list. Be that aviation or navy. And i ment exactly what i wrote. Not what you wish to see. But we`ll get back to that in a moment. 2) What part of " publicly available performance data from manufacturer, plus videos of working MFDs and HUD that are all over youtube. Plus hundreds of Cockpit pictures" strikes you as "completely made up" ? MAC unfortunalely will have FF planes simlified to FC3 fidelity plus FC3 itself. And that`s it. It`s sole purpose is to flatten learning curve for lazy part of the noobs that are to come to ED ecosystem. And Ace Combat that you so predictably mentioned is just another extreme end of the spectrum with FF planes being at it`s opposite end. Which gives you an idea of a golden middle between those two. That would appeal to a bigger midcore audience. 3) Sure DCS is more flight oriented in it`s playable branch. But DCS stands for Digital _COMBAT_ Simulator. Hence DCS and not DFS) And if anything adding more units will only contribute to this "ethos" if you will. Be they air, sea or ground units, playable or not. As for CA - sure there are people who don`t like many things about it. But isn`t that true for FC3 and many of the FF modules too? So people who dont like stuff are allways a factor that doesn`t stop developers from doing their work. 4) Sure CA has nothing to do with <<playable>> aviation as of yet. But all AI planes are present, so your statement is kinda streched here too. And here me out again - as a solution to the absence of modern playable jets it is a perfect place to add them coz of its lesser "study level" implementation. CA is it`s own separate niche in this regard that allows for playable modern aviation. Which obviously is in very high demand and obviously can`t be implemented in FC3 and MAC let alone FF modules. 5) Exactly man! Those sensitive jets are only Ai in FC3 cos they can`t be implemented there same way exising molules were made. No docks, legal procecuion - classyfied in one word. And that`s where CA comes into play. Examples are Mig 31, Su-34, Su-25TM, and Su-30 that yo mentioned. You said you wouldn`t be surprised if it was something made up. Well there are many more things "made up" by ED in a most thorrough and scrutinized manner that ED is known for and they constantly improving on all of those things. That`s why all the fluctuation of many parameters in various departments of DCS. 6) They are protected yes. That`s why the only existing ED product that allows for them to exist id CA. I feel myself repeating a lot coz your statements often do,sorry. 7) Again your "completely made up" argument that doesn`t stand here. And Mig thet you`re talking about needs a lot of variables mentioned above to be established to be implemented. And giving it as an example to CA situation is out of the scope of this topic don`t you think? 8 ) And no i`m not alking about Ace Combat. Have you played it? or wached gampay, campaign walkthrough perhps? On a different difficulty levels even? If you did then why would you throw it in like that. Its the ultimate arcade on the console for God`s sake man comon!) You can`t be seriously talking about equal sign between it and CA playables. There are no plans for adding simplified LF fidelity aircraft in FC3 for sure. Coz all the jazz involved and the price of FC3 module doesn`t make economical sence to go through all this trouble. Approach taken in CA on the other hand is quite the opposite. A golden opportunity to have such shortage of goods in the times of total abundance.
-
Йо хо хо! И бытылка рома!!! А что есть здравый смысл в данном случае?
-
Do you play Combined Arms(CA)? have you noticed level of Fidelity of those playable ground units? And yet they contribute to gameplay regardless. Your demands for fully recreated functionality of the cockpits are kinda out of Combined Arms domain. That`s why nobody in any government will ever give a damn about them being played there. And yet same simplified approach for jets would they be they included will produce much higher detailed interior nonetheless. With same attention to all the knobs , buttons MFD screens and their symbology. It would be most detailed and High Fidelity module in CA. Highest standart compared to anything that`s there atm. So what exactly is the issue here. It`s CA after all. That`s what makes it possible to even hope for those jets. Given there is no way on earth you`ll ever get them otherwise. You feel me?
-
Yep funny stuff but duable too
-
The only way there is to have "sensitive" aircraft in the game is to have them in Combined Arms(CA) format. That would be so sick if ED would add few of modernized Red birds this way. No docks required, just publicly available performance data from manufacturer, plus videos of working MFDs and HUD that are all over youtube. Plus hundreds of Cockpit pictures. With nonclickable cockpit and sometimes simle flight model. Playable ground units in CA are not even Low Fidelity and still have their place and purpose in gameplay. And fun to play too.Imagine if ED made airplane modules for CA and sold them for the price of FC3 modules! I`d buy them all. And i know there are many many guys that would gladly give their cash for those birds. There are few dozen of thousands of buyers craving for each of those many modern jets you can give them this way. There is a ton of cash to be made this way that could be spent on creating other FF modules. ED already has a lot of non flyable AI "sensitive" jets that would be right at home in CA as flyable modules. Withought any procecution from government. Man the planes we could have then! J-11B,J-15, Various Russian multirole Flankers and Fulcrums.( even Mig-35 and Su-35) Mig-31, gen 4++, gen 5 -man list goes on and on. There are so many possibilities that CA brings to the table as a product. Many of desired jet versions have allready most of the elements present in DCS. (airframes, weapons simple and pro flight models) The only missing parts are the cockpits which in many cases could be a bit remodelled from existing ones in case of Flankers and Fulcrums. 100 percent legit and viable solution to this everlasting problem. Hope devs will give it a good thought and will make it happen.
-
PL-12 починили) Она снова на вооружении. Помимо китайских Сушек появились навороченные отечественные. С модифицированной боевой загрузкой. Су-33 с четырьмя Р-27ЭТ. Су-27 с двумя дополнительными Р-27Т. Пару звеньев с Р-33(за неимением Р-37). В общем прокачка авиации без оглядки на гос бюджет и бюрократические нехотелки ) Без всякой претензии на соответствие вооружения строевых бортов. Но со слюнявой оглядкой на пышные проспекты по их модернизации)
-
Товарищи разработчики, было бы очень здорово если бы в Combined Arms добавили бы летабельную авиацию. J-11B, J-15, Миг-31, многоцелевые версии Мигов и Сушек а то и сам Су-35. То бишь все борты на которых полно фото и видео кабин, работающих дисплеев и тд., но нет документации. Взять тот же супер секретный Су-35. В ютубе несколько роликов с работающими дисплеями, илсами и тд и тп. Фотографий кабины вообще море. И так по всем другим бортам которые не могут быть включены в линейку FC3. Но так и просятся в линейку Сombined Arms. Играбельной наземке что там уже есть отсутствие документации не помеха. Её и Low Fidelity то не назовешь. И ничего. Продукт имеющий право на существование. Со своей аудиторией, которая разрастётся во много раз, будь в ней современная авиация. Как отдельные платные модули для него, такие самолёты по цене модулей FC3 разлетелись бы как горячие пирожки. Очень приятный подарок для нескольких десятков тысяч изголодавшихся по этим самолётам игроков и солидный доход для студии. Вариантов монетизации уйма. Формат Combined Arms это единственный выход из тупиковой ситуации с засекреченными бортами красных, да и синих тоже. Понятное дело не кликабельных и с упрощенной моделью полёта. Целая линейка самолётов может быть введена в игру таким образом. И ноль проблем с законом. Win Win situation как говорят у синих) У вас же столько материала накоплено столько ботов, ракет, моделей готовых. Кабины только домоделить. Можно ли надеяться на такой подарок? Спасибо!
-
То есть срединного/нейтрального положения у ползунка нет?
-
Подскажите пожалуйста какой движковый переключатель там стоит. Трёх или двух позиционный? Не такой?
-
If you say so `,)
-
If using F-15 and F-16 as mockups for all kinds of Flankers and Fulcrums isn`t far fetched for you than nothing in DCS ever will be i guess. So we`re cool) Don`t get triggered like that man, - chill) Take it easy`,)
-
Hence "EXERCISE RED FLAG" my friend. Simulations they have at Nellis (both real ones and computer simulated) are way more far fetched that anything you`ll ever see in DCS both for Blue and Red. If they do that with all seriousness, than why we have to cringe ? When the ones we can have is way less of a stretch. That`s why server you can fly those buffed jets is named after it`s real life inspiration.
-
You see we as a virtual pilots can enjoy all those buffs withought all the burocracy and billions of tax payers money at stake. So why limit ourselves to what upgrades 5 star generals decided to procure or not procure for those jets back then. Why deprive ourselves just coz some old farts didn`t have enough pocket money to equip those jets with cool toys) Your strict approach is 100% legit for recreating real battles that happened before. Rest of the cases are good to go in that sence.
