What do you want to see most in DCS World?

[kontiuka]

That doesn't sound like an argument against it, on the contrary. Wrong word? :D

No. He's saying he disagrees with the argument.

[PiedDroit]

No. He's saying he disagrees with the argument.

Ah yes right, I read it the other way

[wilky510]

Voted 4th generation multirole fighters. I wish we could get some more "FC" level aircraft, with PFM attached, such as the F-16. Then this could allow a "step up" program down the road to make it full DCS level with less time involved since the cockpit, PFM would be already done. I really enjoy DCS study sims, but they take a LONG time to make. Having some aircraft to fly with a PFM is very fun inbetween waiting for new aircraft. I've been playing since LOMAC days, and the PFM just makes all the FC level aircraft a new beast/fun to play.

[Tello]

I do hope that we could see more tools for the guys creating big community/Multiplayer events.

That is sort of my "Dynamic campaign"

 

MIA: MISSING IN ARMCHAIR

 

- Greater tools for the guys creating community events where what ever module I fly can shine and make best use. SP is great for learning in a controlled and static environment.

 

Oh and bring on some high fidelity fighters to support that high fidelity A-10C.

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

I voted 4th gen but I would like to see more vietnam era jets like thuds and mig 17/19

[Endy]

Voted multiplayer, but Dynamic Campaign is also very important provided it means the kind of DC that Falcon BMS has. Meaning an ongoing 24/7 war even without player input and the ability to create single or multiplayer missions at any given point in time during the conflict. So sort of what some other guys mentioned.

 

Anyway, it'd be nice to know what DC option means in the poll, because if it's only like a random mission generator just with changing frontlines, base ownership etc. then not really...

[XeNoise]

4th generation multirole, improved audio and graphics.. Hard to decide. Most important would be the stability of multiplayer sessions and the netcode.

[Rikus]

If improve the weather engine, was an option, im sure that would have lot of votes too.

[Х-stounds]

Damage model!!!

MiG-29 and F-16 and for the happiness does not need anything!

[Joghurt]

Please add frequency-depending voice-chat! :)

[SkateZilla]

Please add frequency-depending voice-chat! :)

 

pretty sure there is a team speak plugin for that already, that models freq. and horizon etc

[Koriel]

The single item that I miss most in DCS is having the feeling that I'm part of a living breathing world. While DCS looks great, it's not the graphics that make a game. It's the immersion, playability.

 

Let me use an off-the-wall example. The single most popular game these days is Minecraft. It looks kinda bad and dated but it has playability in spades.

 

When I enter a mission, apart from the civil traffic and some animated cranes, nothing moves that hasn't been placed there by the mission designer. It's an empty, dead world.

 

Even the AI placed in a mission behaves really really poorly. Mind you, I'm not talking about combat, I couldn't comment on that, I'm talking about normal flight profiles. Just a few items I get upset about:

 

Excessive use of afterburner or airbrake to maintain a certain speed.

Multiple planes arriving at an airport are really messing up the approaches, sometimes even causing crashes.

Planes stopping on the runway, or using the whole runway instead of vacating at the first possible intersection thereby blocking the runway for other traffic.

For fighters it should be allowed to land in sequence depending on conditions.

A flight of multiple fighters should be able to join a close in traffic pattern after an overhead break.

What all these AI planes lack is common sense, no real pilot would fly like this, and I find this very aggravating.

 

Years ago I alreay wrote a paper for Wags on how to improve this, but never got a response and I haven't seen any progress on this either.

 

DCS is pretty graphics, nice planes but no immersion for me.. :-(

[Ragequits]

pretty sure there is a team speak plugin for that already, that models freq. and horizon etc

 

http://www.excessiveheadspace.com/tars/

 

Yes and it is really good BUT they stopped developing and updating it. Don't know if it even works anymore. But maybe there is a new plugin I might have missed.

[531-Ghost]

The F4 Phantom would be an AWESOME addition!

[Nirvi]

.......But maybe there is a new plugin I might have missed.

 

Yes, Aries :)

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=104800

[shagrat]

A neutral faction in addition to red and blue and along with it CIVILIAN models! As in different cultural background civilians and armed insurgents, infantry etc.

 

Just to have a neutral faction (unarmed civilians, or neutral military) opens a new world of options in realistic mission design...

ROE do NOT hit the neutral faction, only attack when no civilians are in danger... Do not provoke the xyz Military, just hit the insurgents etc.

[Stealth_Eagle]

I personally really want to have some DCS WW2 Bombers and DCS strike aircraft (think along the lines of a Tornado and related aircraft). I'm probably in the minority here but I have a strong preference for bomber style aircraft.

[quaRk]

I voted "Older era aricraft from WWII to Vietnam" and hope for a Ta152 H-0 in the future. (Flown it in WT, but the FM there was a joke :( :mad: ).

 

The "Dynamic campaign system" will not be too shabby also ;).

 

Btw.: First post here. So hello everyone! :smartass:

[greco.bernardi]

I personally really want to have some DCS WW2 Bombers and DCS strike aircraft (think along the lines of a Tornado and related aircraft). I'm probably in the minority here but I have a strong preference for bomber style aircraft.

 

I and another fighter will like too much to see some bombers with human pilots for scort or kill.

[deadzone]

Why not an IA for tanks CA or you can give orders to the driver , for example , and you to the turret

to pull

[t4trouble]

Need better netcode !

[Coxy_99]

What DCS is lacking is maps:

 

Yes we have the black sea map

Nevada is nearly ready

1944 Northern europe for our ww2 module counter parts

 

But what about different era's:

 

Vetinam

Falklands

Korea war

 

Hell id even fly ww1 map an aircraft over the trenches

 

We need maps and era's settings for our modules, I would say then dcs would be complete.

[AtaliaA1]

I voted "Other". I would love to see a DX12 ver. of DCS. World.

 

Complete rebuild of the program to take advantage of modern Tech. Multi-Processor using all 4 cores. can't imagine needing more than that right now.

[greco.bernardi]

What DCS is lacking is maps:

 

Yes we have the black sea map

Nevada is nearly ready

1944 Northern europe for our ww2 module counter parts

 

But what about different era's:

 

Vetinam

Falklands

Korea war

 

Hell id even fly ww1 map an aircraft over the trenches

 

We need maps and era's settings for our modules, I would say then dcs would be complete.

 

I agree! You miss that we will have Straith of Homuz map too.

 

Vietnam and Korea will be fantastic! Another incredible map that can be done is some think that cover israeli and arab conflicts. Too many era´s of war planes did take many action in that region.

[NineLine]

Hey guys, 28 people chose the "Other option" there should be about 28 posts in this thread, please don't use this thread as a wishlist discussion thread, the goal is to get a clear and concise idea of what you want... right now its pretty muddy.

 

For wishlist discussions http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=438