Healthy critique small points..

[macedk]

Hi :)

 

Some might have been brought up before, but here is my 2 cents.

 

 

1. Multiplayer clouds, not synced, maybe one day, as the ww2 flying might be dependent on cloud hiding.

 

2. Transition of sun position, it jumps and is not linear, my design idea for a mission was...startup of jets and letting ai go takeoff, during the late afternoon. So wanted transition from late afternoon into early evening to night at the end. Looked at the shadow on the mountain on nevada map and pling it jumped, breaking the emersion. Again online play.

 

It might be something for down the road and small things but point 1 is important,as it breaks again emersion.

 

Point 2 is more of a feel thing, easing people into nightops. My idea was that people start all good and used to it and breaks into to night and stuff just got real but at a healthy pace. Just ask race drivers on the transition face of a race. Everybody is happy and hunky dory to dead serious and quiet on the radio :).

 

Overall, what we can do it amazing but not all the way there ..sorry ;)

 

3. Tacan for all airports, in case people want to navigate, to be blunt just fake it, copy paste and make a different value. Why because we have srs and human awacs and what not...if people want to navigate the prober way let them :).

 

4. Ok we all cry realism but most of us can not cope with that, p51 comes to mind (u want real ..u got it! ) ;)Of course listen to your customers but carefully ;) And a fine line and nobody is happy ..i know.... tough one.

 

Sum up ...might be my lack of skill in mission building ..not understanding the tool ...granted ..but point 1 and 2 I don't understand.

 

We have all seen other companies taking a wrong approach and sticking to their guns...in this case, it seems there is room for change and improvement. The counter point is "Mace we are working on it , you ungrateful piece of customer" ;)

 

I'll never forget my first time in the ka-50 ..all clickable and a russian detailed airframe...But what I took from that was also the very different approach to the same thing, that the east and west has or had. Blew my mind.

 

To flip the coin ...I know you do your best (dev). Things take time and bugs and stuff ...and yes bosses hate me but somebody has to be the one to say "the emperor does not have any clothes on" ;)

[twistking]

4. Ok we all cry realism but most of us can not cope with that, p51 comes to mind (u want real ..u got it! ) ;)Of course listen to your customers but carefully ;) And a fine line and nobody is happy ..i know.... tough one.

What do you mean with that? Whats's about the p-51 and realism?

[Jester986]

If you want less realism for more playability you've come to the wrong place for sympathy.

[Emmy]

3) Nope...

 

If you get caught out in the AO with low fuel or in bad weather, that's a YOU problem due to poor planning or getting greedy and not adhering to your Joker or Bingo. Plan better and fly that plan.

[Mars Exulte]

#4

Um, no there isn't a ''fine line'', the whole point of DCS and the core of its appeal is to maximise realism to the extent feasible (at least, aiming for it, achievement is debatable, of course). If you want more abstract aircraft systems and management, then you should go play any of the many games that cater to that rather than trying to alter a hardcore sim into not being hardcore. That's just illogical.

 

That said, MAC is supposed to be a simplified version of some core DCS components and is due for launch at some point in the near future. It may be more what you're looking for.

[Tippis]

3) Nope...

 

If you get caught out in the AO with low fuel or in bad weather, that's a YOU problem due to poor planning or getting greedy and not adhering to your Joker or Bingo. Plan better and fly that plan.

On the other hand, that whole point could very reasonably be rewritten as: fully implement the TACAN (and RSBN) mobile trucks and stations that actually already exists as models and code stubs, and let mission makers sprinkle them out as needed, much like one would expect that they'd be if someone decides to set up camp at a specific base.

 

 

It almost makes you sad to see these left-behind artefacts of a really worth-while nav beacon system, and how its not being finished forces third parties to implement their own bespoke solutions that then don't carry over to other planes that by all rights should have the exact same systems. :(

[macedk]

thx for the feedback :)

[WinterH]

Yeah, have to join the nope-crowd for relaxed-realism argument. Note that P-51 already has optional aids like auto rudder, take off assistence etc.