Varis

The engine would need to be suitable for flight simulation. I'd think the only engines out there are used to build competing products. Also there might be long term business risks like the engine being discontinued or the license terms may change once you start making money...

AFAIK the Allied side doesn't have a heavy flak gun but there is a 40mm one. The lack of bombers is more of an obvious omission - for fighters we are pretty well covered already. Basically I'm happy with WW2 stuff save the bombers - there's other stuff missing in DCS that is more urgent. It's a bit of an issue with the whole DCS - the scope is very broad, it's a bit all over the place and ED wants to make it extremely detailed. A bit of a challenge to make any area complete in anything that's a reasonable time. Also the asset pack is sold with a deep discount with the map... a rather sane policy...

The new campaign also introduces CA piecemeal and presumably would get a bunch of small updates over the next few months.

Sharp eyes, lad :thumbup: The 1.5 one looks much more like a real photo for colours as well :huh:

Well you don't perform a cold start on CA assets :smilewink: I believe you can find tutorials on YouTube, and yes there is a bunch of regular missions in the module.

Interesting stuff that's going on. Don't think MS has monetized Windows for ages, maybe they think the old platform lock is no longer maintainable. Think their money is in the business infrastructure where the platform lock is at a higher layer.

Ground forces in a flight simulator have three possible interactions (besides the operational level cf. dynamic campaign): 1. Air assets are fighting ground assets 2. Ground assets are fighting each other 3. Ground assets are fighting air assets Obviously, #1 is great in DCS. #2 is there - not great, but I hope it will improve. #3 - very limited, even though a nice collection of AA assets are there. What can be done? Think ED has stated that they are not interested in a high-fidelity SAM simulator - the claim is that it couldn't return its development cost. One option could be to bring more player controllable, simple sort of direct fire AA assets, from various AA guns to igla trucks, strelas etc. Also if players could move and deploy more serious SAM units. Then we have existing / ongoing engine improvements like the new radar system that's been created for the Hornet. What if that could be given to ground based early warning and other radars? We could get a key element of the Soviet era ground based interception systems that were used to vector in interceptors at least still for the Mig-29A. Beyond that, they could even package it into a module like FC3 if the development is very intensive. Players could control the ADN (Air Defense Network) which would make the game a whole lot more rewarding since there would be a new higher challenge for the experienced air players. (Or, you could help out other newbs in a coop mission.)

Would it be possible in the coming months to get a Newsletter/Wags video about Combined Arms 2.0? (And any exciting developments around it.) Would really like some insight into how high ED is aiming with this module and what the schedule roughly looks like. (For the last 7 years some of us have sort of been waiting for the module to "get there" :dunno:) Thoughts on the module's history and place in the whole of DCS: World could be interesting too. And of course a good opportunity to discuss any possible related development like improvements to infantry and maps/environment, damage model, player controllable AA units/Air Defence Networks (ADN), the RTS aspects of the game/user interface, the new CA campaign and the dynamic campaign...

LOL a RMX 550 X is what runs my DCS box. Likely you now have two PSUs worth keeping even if it's not the issue :smilewink:

Looks impressive. Progress has been faster than expected. Razbam will have a nice start to the year. Enjoy your holidays!

Looks nice... still lots of work to be done on the WW2 side to bring it up to par.

Yes wattage is not reliable unless it's at least top brand but there is much more to PSU than wattage... The brand matters but the model may matter more. Look for the 80 Plus labels/certification... Gold is preferable. Corsair makes some pretty decent ones but also the cheap ones... I have one of the better myself, but 2 from Enermax and before that I just didn't know the stuff...

Oh yes there has been some excellent trailer material in the streams, with the commentary and all that.

Yes it's a surprise, at first it didn't occur to me to check. New products usually have a tighter discount policy (eg. bonuses don't apply). Hopefully it's a sign that ED wants to create new interest in CA.

You can also turn them off/on based on object class (there's more hotkeys).

It's very cool actually that we have the names from 104th. The streams weren't bad at all and commenting was top notch. The old HT streams don't seem to be up anymore though and not sure if 104th streams are regularly watched outside certain circles. There's tons that can be done for promotion, just takes a lot of effort. The above is a very good example, well done! :thumbup: I've tried to recruit more participants from the DCS Finland community, would like to also have a helicopter arm to SF so there's a long term interest. Otherwise not really sure how to market a stream to the DCS community. Do we have a thread on Reddit? With CA being more on the table and the campaign out (and on sale, btw) could be a nice idea to add some ground targets again (armor, maybe a sprinkling of shilkas) to the next mission. Gazelle-M might make sense then but it's generally not that useful in the helicopter tournament. For multicrew ships, the minigun version could make sense but not sure what was the final verdict whether it's useful in the tournament - the pilot doesn't have weapons and the minigun also has aiming issues? However the mistral version could be very interesting with a co-pilot. Pitbull flew the L version with a co-pilot in the last round. A co-pilot takes load off from the pilot in the form of spotting, navigation and communications, possibly even tactics as well. Please send me a PM if you decide to pursue this route.

Did you notice some pretty new products are -50% off as well? The Combined Arms: Frontlines Georgia Campaign which is a nice introduction to different aspects of CA. And the reportedly rather decent C-101CC. PS. Don't forget to complete your collection of helicopters! :music_whistling:

Technically, we as paying customers have the best data available: we have first level insight into what product features would be really interesting. ED only arrives at this information via observation and inference. For the points you make - yes we perhaps don't have the same quality of information as ED does - except in maybe some points like how many people actually go to multiplayer and so. However for pretty much everything you list there is public data available which can allow us to establish the ballpark if required, or such data could be gathered. There was recently someone who counted how many forum posts each aircraft has, giving us some figures to infer aircraft popularity (eg. Viggen very high, Mig-15 surprisingly low). ED has has also shared some insights like Wags commenting that the WW2 modules are some of the best selling ones. Oh yes there is a subjective component - when discussing DCS features every one of us tends to look between his own two butt cheeks and loves what he finds there - somebody wants to play individual infantrymen in FPS, somebody else would be just happy if they could buy more additional skins and so on. My argument avoids this problem because the structure is much more sophisticated: It interprets a real strategic pattern that is based on the current capabilities of the DCS platform and its opportunities in the multiplayer game market. I listed some alternative focus areas but at the core what I'm here interested in is a set of features which have synergy between each other and in relation to the flight simulation components. There is the possibility of developing a coherent and a highly attractive player experience. What you are talking above is exactly the non-focused, or should I rather say, dispersed model of development or developer resource allocation that ED is utilizing. And one should not confuse this with the possible lack of focus in ED's product feature strategy (the core subject of the thread). They are basically two different (if not always entirely separate) discussions. And this is not actually a point of criticism. The development model makes sense for exactly the reasons you list above and may very well be the key component in ED's successful strategy to make a competitive flight simulation platform without charging us hundreds of bucks for every module or without falling too far behind the competition in the long run. However with regard to the product, in my eye, would need is a stronger focus on the value chain of the following core engine features (platform improvements): Dynamic campaign Combined Arms RTS user interface improvements Content creation tools (mission editor, SDK) Multiplayer functionality Now all of these are in the ED roadmap but what we are getting down the road may just be too little too late if they are not seen as core areas in DCS. Especially Combined Arms looks very problematic at the moment - there are missing features and user experience is far from great, yet the module is priced similar to the aircraft, almost all of which can deliver to the paying customer. There is little indication where and how far ED intends to go with this area. At the same time making great progress would need intensive upgrades to the DCS engine, implying that rounding out the DCS platform in the fashion it has been waiting for 7 years would come with a high development cost. RTS and user interface elements are a focal pain area - it looks like ED is aware of this because they have recruited RTS specialist(s) and Nineline is hunting for the desirable requirements in this area. Also the Dynamic campaign sounds like it could be a really big feature in ED's mind, but it's probably the item that has the least development actually done in the list above. An editor upgrade at least is going to arrive at some point, but while there is a good possibility for user created content the platform is far from the greatest for that. Multiplayer is one great way to make use of all these improvements - the dedicated server can already start a landslide but the area needs to push beyond releasing just a single upgrade. ED is not exactly some small indie studio either. There are a bit over 100 developers (?) in the DCS ecosystem and actually they are often not that close but are separated into different companies, subsidiaries, teams etc not to mention different countries and continents. It requires some pretty good orchestration to keep this machine moving forward in a sensible fashion - I think also the Russian culture comes into play and a western organization with the same goals wouldn't be able to pull it off in the exact same fashion. In some ways it is still a learning experience for ED, eg. also the current focus still involves some lessons to be learned on how to mentor the 3rd party developers and how to manage the partnership.

All save mirage would be very interesting and good choices for you. The Mig-21 might be a bit tricky to fly and helicopters of course are entirely different. The Ka-50 will get a new cockpit because it's a very old one and some people claim it has issues (haven't noticed anything besides some indicator lights myself). Gazelle and Huey are easier for the systems, Huey is more of a challenge if you want to do a cold start. Also these helicopters are fairly easy to fly - the gazelle is like a sports car and is a very lively platform.

Eep! :helpsmilie: First you'll have to catch me... :prop: The streams can be a blast to watch even if a player doesn't fly oneself. At least one gets educated about what each model can do. I think the only thing we'd need to reach your stated goal would be some promotion/fame for the streams :unsure:

You need to have your spreadsheet well prepared in advance. Then you can buy all your modules on Day 1 with no hesitation. And then spend some more a few hours before it ends because you had doubts if you're really fully stocked yet :music_whistling:

I almost didn't spot the 2nd appearance... but it's not a sign... it is TWO signs! :pilotfly:

You seriously didn't spot the Mi-24? :helpsmilie:

So anybody flying the new C-101 yet?

Well FC3 can be a very good option now that there's a sale. Just saying.