System failures for "client" aircraft in multiplayer.

[statrekmike]

As of right now, it is possible in the mission editor to enable various system failures as long as the plane in question is set to "player". This is fine for single player missions and while it does rely on a individual module's specific implementation of system failures, it works rather well. Sadly, this option is simply not present for "client" aircraft in a multiplayer mission.

 

Now, to be clear, I understand the thought behind this. Obviously such a feature would not be useful for larger public server scenarios and the like but since that system needs to be manually enabled by the mission maker, it is easy to not use such a feature if the server's usual visitors would not like it. All that said. There are mission makers and even smaller private groups that would really enjoy having the ability to enable random failures for "client" aircraft. It would make a great training tool or even act as a way to spice up co-op missions. You could even argue that having such a system justifies doing proper start-ups that include system tests and the like.

 

Again, I know that this kind of thing would not be of any use for big public servers but since it would essentially be the same as the "player" set aircraft option, it would be something that a mission maker would have to specifically set out to enable and thus would only become a factor on servers that desire it.

 

Please. This would be a great way to give smaller groups more mission creation options without having to create a whole new thing. The system already exists for aircraft set to "player", why not allow it as a option for aircraft set to "client" as well?

[twistking]

+1 :thumbup:

[QuiGon]

+1

 

It has been requested quite a couple of times, e.g. here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=209791

[discwalker]

+1

But currently unwantedly or without a proper conception working on all client aircrafts in the same manner if same kind with the placed "player" A/C to multiplayer mission with preprogrammed system failures.

[Aarnoman]

+1

[mhe]

+1

[Pheonix0869]

+1

 

[dorianR666]

+1

[upyr1]

this would really be cool if we could incorproate realistic failure rates or at least random ones

[JayJ]

+1

Imagine events like EMP pulse during a mission that would damage all clients' radars and radio communications. We need that feature badly.

Edited August 15, 2022 by JayJ

[SharpeXB]

The trouble with realistic failure rates is that they’re so rare a pilot could fly their whole career without experiencing one. I’ve had one bird strike on takeoff in the A-10C and it was awesome. I responded the right way and landed scratching my head wondering who shot me. Then realized it was a bird!

Also I don’t suppose many modules have their systems modeled to the degree required to respond to these. I know the Warthog does and the M-2000C just got an update. 

[Tippis]

39 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Also I don’t suppose many modules have their systems modeled to the degree required to respond to these.

All of them except FC3. In fact, that's the very thing that sets FC3 apart.

[MAXsenna]

6 minutes ago, Tippis said:

All of them except FC3. In fact, that's the very thing that sets FC3 apart.

You can't fly through cables though.

[Tippis]

16 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

You can't fly through cables though.

For certain values of “can”… and “fly”.

[TEMPEST.114]

On 1/20/2020 at 6:57 PM, statrekmike said:

As of right now, it is possible in the mission editor to enable various system failures as long as the plane in question is set to "player". This is fine for single player missions and while it does rely on a individual module's specific implementation of system failures, it works rather well. Sadly, this option is simply not present for "client" aircraft in a multiplayer mission.

 

Now, to be clear, I understand the thought behind this. Obviously such a feature would not be useful for larger public server scenarios and the like but since that system needs to be manually enabled by the mission maker, it is easy to not use such a feature if the server's usual visitors would not like it. All that said. There are mission makers and even smaller private groups that would really enjoy having the ability to enable random failures for "client" aircraft. It would make a great training tool or even act as a way to spice up co-op missions. You could even argue that having such a system justifies doing proper start-ups that include system tests and the like.

 

Again, I know that this kind of thing would not be of any use for big public servers but since it would essentially be the same as the "player" set aircraft option, it would be something that a mission maker would have to specifically set out to enable and thus would only become a factor on servers that desire it.

 

Please. This would be a great way to give smaller groups more mission creation options without having to create a whole new thing. The system already exists for aircraft set to "player", why not allow it as a option for aircraft set to "client" as well?

+1

[ShadowFrost]

+1

[RDN_Garrett]

+1

 

[Ahogephilia]

+1

any news?

[Mav87th]

+1

Still a much wanted feature.

[Fitzcarraldo]

On 1/27/2025 at 8:37 AM, Mav87th said:

+1

Still a much wanted feature.

i agree. should be easy to implement as well. it works in singleplayer already...

[Jself]

+1 on this.. please implement for client aircraft

[Migratingcoconut]

Wish I could + infinity.

I mean I really feel like we've already been paying to experience this. The modules have all the detail baked into them & most importantly a price tag to reflect this only for the core game to not allow us to explore it in a realistic manner. Generally in the commercial flight-simming industry it is true that 'study-sim' & having system failures simulated necessarily go hand-in-hand. I am aware we get a 'random system failure' option but it's basically pointless. In multiplayer it just randomly fails one system on a given plane and its the same system on the same plane every time the mission is loaded. That blows. Mind you this is when aircraft are set to 'client'. I pretty much only fly that way so I just turn it all off. I and many players would find it rewarding if during thorough ground procedures we were actually checking to make sure things were working for a reason. You know, the same reason those procedures even exist and got modeled & sold to us right?

I seriously have to ask, how hard is it to implement the following?:

===

Within triggers rightmost menu: 'ACTIONS'
-SET FAILURE: (this is already there)
--Dropdown menu named 'UNIT': Select which of the air units that have been placed you want. (This is not there.)
--Dropdown menu named 'FAILURE': (this is already there)
--Probability (%) <> 100 (this is already there)
--Within (mm) <> 1 (this is already there)

===

Just off the top of my head this would allow for something like the following to be done: You set a moving trigger zone around a carrier & fly an F-14B on approach to land. A trigger is set in the mission that within 5 seconds of any and all F-14Bs entering that proximity to the moving carrier & with your MSL altitude lower than 450' you will get a right compressor stall that complicates your landing, but there's like a 30% chance of it anytime those conditions are met. Just adds a level of immersion, as though these jets have been used plenty.
It would also allow for any amount of AI planes to have their systems triggered to fail too.
It would put the power in the mission editors hands to determine when which failures can happen.

As for the 'random system failures' checkbox, it would make sense if it were to be randomized & generated on a per load/instance basis instead of per mission-file basis like I was saying. Honestly one could (should?) make a bug-report of this as: 'feature that's not working properly' or better yet 'is improperly neglected/missing from the game'. Like I said, we've been sold this immersion. If FS 2004 pay-ware addons could offer it, why cant DCS in 2025????????????????? No exaggeration, look up PMDG 737 for FS2004.

Edited 17 hours ago by Migratingcoconut