Suggestion to emphasize the late Cold War more in DCS as long way goal for DCS

[Northstar98]

TaxDollarsAtWork said:

Redfor isn't just Russia

 

What if some one does want to sim a near peer adversary like India or China and so on like a client state such as Algeria Indonesia in the 2000s or 2010s...

With India, you basically already can (no map for it though), although not really REDFOR, GREENFOR maybe...

China is a good choice and they already have some peer ships (even if their graphics are pretty lacklustre for the most part), but again, missing a map. Marianas might fix that...

TaxDollarsAtWork said:

Not ever scenario needs to be Saddam's Iraq as there are other what if potential hotspots

Yes, we know; the point is that the vast majority of assets are pre-90s Cold War -era, peer 2000s-2010s REDFOR is impossible for Russia, and it's probably pretty difficult for China, so arguably the better option is BLUFOR variants and other aircraft that fit...

Edited January 12, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[bies]

Redfor isn't just Russia

 

What if some one does want to sim a near peer adversary like India or China and so on like a client state such as Algeria Indonesia in the 2000s or 2010s...

 

 

Not ever scenario needs to be Saddam's Iraq as there are other what if potential hotspots

 

When it comes to India or China we will not see any mid 2000s planes due to strict cassification, just like in case of Russia. The same with mid 2000s SAMs, ships, everything.

 

According to extremally asymetric scenarios - yes, they are possible, but boring. Theoretically you can even make some USA vs. Benin in 2005, where Benin is using WWII equipement and USA Hornets and Vipers, but it's boring, and not suited to dynamic campaign which is being work on nor any SP scenario.

 

 

Why it's so boring you may ask? During last interview C.W.Lemoine spoke with former A-10 Warthog pilot and asks him to compare his war in Desert Storm Gulf War 1991 and Afganistan. Warthog pilot relies, the difference was risk: in Afganistan there was simply no risk at all, like a training flights, loitering at high alt and dropping some bomb without any opposition or any loses in the squadron. During close to symetric full scale 1991 Desert Storm against "4th army of the world" there was huge risk, same A-10 guys was being killed, enemy was shooting to them like in WWII movie and they were destroying hundreds of enemy tanks, AFVs, artilery etc. They were flying at 100ft over the ground at night, without night vision or pod, to avoid detection - just like they were trained to combat Soviet mechanized invasion in Europe during 1970s and 80s. That's interesting as a simulator scenario or dynamic campaign in the future.

Edited October 11, 2020 by bies

[TotenDead]

Close to symmetric? 4th army in the world? He-he. Us-led coalition vs an army with little to none modern equipment is nowhere near "symmetric". However, i wouldn't argue with the rest of your comment

[bies]

Close to symmetric? 4th army in the world? He-he. Us-led coalition vs an army with little to none modern equipment is nowhere near "symmetric". However, i wouldn't argue with the rest of your comment

 

Yes, Iraqi army didn't stand a chance, theoretically they really had 4th-largest army of the world, and battle hardened after long Iraq-Iran war - but it was mostly Iraqi propaganda, i wrote that as a sign of those times, with a pinch of salt obviously.

 

Still, only semi symetrical conflict looked so totally different from the real pilot perspective than completely helpless terrorist/insurgencies bombing without any risk with standoff weapon.

Edited October 11, 2020 by bies

[Evoman]

+9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

 

I'd say that the mid-to late 1960s/1970s up to the early 1990s are the perfect era for DCS.

 

Firstly, the overwhelming majority of assets are late Cold War/Soviet era stuff, the only real exceptions are the Chinese ships, and the ships in the Supercarrier module. Most aircraft we have are of the same era, the only ones that aren't is our current selection of BLUFOR aircraft (A-10C/C II, AV-8B NA, F-16C Block 50, F/A-18C Lot 20 and the Mirage 2000(?))

 

There are a coupe of sought after maps that are right at home in this era too, such as Germany/Fulda Gap and the Baltic.

 

Aircraft in theory should be easier to get documentation on and potentially easier to develop. The only thing there is however is the development of older RADARs - the F-14 and the Viggen both I think use raycasting to simulate their respective RADARs, I think Magnitude 3 is upgrading the MiG-21bis to also use raycasting to simulate it's RADAR.

 

For me, I personally love this era mostly because everything seems much more interesting, with equipment that are icons for me personally. And screaming down low, NOE to ripple off high drag bombs, definitely beats pressing a button and sending a JSOW its way.

 

For the aircraft there's plenty to choose from, here's just a selection (it's far from complete) that comes to mind that aren't so far being developed as full modules, of the correct era.

 

• A-6E TRAM/SWIP
  
• A-7D/E
  
• A-10A
  
• AH-1E/F/G
  
• AH-64A
  
• F-4E/J/S/K/M
  
• F-15A, earlier F-15C
  
• F-15E (an earlier one)
  
• F-16A Block 15 all the way up to the F-16C Block 40 w. LANTIRN
  
• F/A-18A (any lot) -> F/A-18C (Lot 10?)
  
• F-104G
  
• F-105D
  
• F-111F
  
• Harrier GR.3/GR.5/AV-8B DA
  
• Jaguar GR.1/3
  
• SH-2F
  
• SH-3H
  
• SH-60B/F
  
• Su-17M3/M4
  
• Tornado IDS/GR.1/1A
  

 

There's also lots of other assets such as ground vehicles, ships, RADARs, SAMs, AAA that would fit, even if they were just upgrades of

 

 

Let’s not forget that we will be getting a Falklands map in the near future. But the most interesting thing that will be coming out of the Falklands map is some of the period aircraft and assets that are already in development or planned will make the Falklands map the most period correct as possible.

Aircraft already in development or planned:

IA-58 Pucara

Mirage III (or) IAI Dagger (either one, not both)

Dassault Super Etendard

Sea Harrier FRS.1

 

https://razbamsimulations.com/index.php/dcs/south-atlantic-terrain-project

 

For me one of the top sought after maps is Vietnam and I didn't even grow up that era.

 

Here are some other aircraft from your list that are currently in development or planned

A-7E – In development by FlyingIron Simulations

A-6E – Planed by Heatblur after they finish with current projects and if they can obtain a license

F-4E – Was stalled but it is in the pipeline once ED finishes up other projects. By recent interviews they stated that they are undecided yet on whether to do just one variant or more.

Edited October 11, 2020 by Evoman

[Torri]

Redfor isn't just Russia

 

What if some one does want to sim a near peer adversary like India or China and so on like a client state such as Algeria Indonesia in the 2000s or 2010s...

 

 

Not ever scenario needs to be Saddam's Iraq as there are other what if potential hotspots

 

+1

[Dragon1-1]

The problem is, we don't really have any maps that would be suited for Chinese, and if you want a peer adversary against the US, practically your only options are the Russians and Chinese. Even then, in 2005, the Chinese weren't quite the powerhouse they are today. This was a period when a fully-fledged "peer adversary" for the US didn't really exist, and the US was merrily pretending they could boss the whole world around. :)

 

We've got:

Caucasus, which is suited for US vs. Russia.

NTTR, which is only good for Blue training or Red Dawn-style "Russians/Chinese invade the US" scenario.

Persian Gulf, which is good for realistic (and perhaps a bit too plausible for comfort) near-peer with Iran.

Syria, where you can have Greece and Turkey go at it over Cyprus... using F-16s and little else. :) Hey, at least we can do it from get-go, just let ED finish the Viper.

 

Notably, none of those are anywhere near the Chinese sphere of influence, and quite far from India and Pakistan, too.

 

As for dynamic campaign, nobody says it has to be a symmetric situation. In fact, that's one way you could make an asymmetric situation fun, you can do a lot with a dynamic campaign. Have the Red side make up with numbers, or limit Blue logistics for political reasons, for instance.

Edited October 11, 2020 by Dragon1-1

[nessuno0505]

ED should better support their current modules, even the oldest ones, before even thinking of doing something new, imho. F-5, korea jets, l-39, huey and so on are long forgotten and bugs are growing.

 

That said, a 1950 korea map with appropriate ai assets would be a great fun both in sp and mp and an occasion to renew f-86 and mig-15.

[bies]

Exactly Korea map, North Germany Fulda gap, Baltic etc.

[S. Low]

OP's ideas are interesting, and so are the discussions I've read through here. I'm primarily a singleplayer guy who is basically biding time until the apache and blackhawk helos are released I'm looking to get the F-16 soon. I'd buy new modules if they interested me, not so much for the cohesion. So.. I'm not sure what to contribute to help OP's theory or ED make informed strategic business decisions. I also don't see why all of OP's ideas can't be achieved currently with server restrictions.

 

Will I play online? I'll compete in any future FoH charity tournaments for sure. I'd play online if the g force simulation was better. Would I buy newer jets like f-35 (not saying its possible, just hypothetical)? Yes. Would I also buy cool cold war stuff like F-4 Phantom? Yes. Is my brain at capacity for complicated jets? Absolutely. I'm currently focused on the M-2000. I still love the hornet and tomcat, but I don't want to commit to them OVER the mirage. And then when the apache gets released, I'll probably give up on mastering the modern jets entirely so I can re-insert all the old apache knowledge into my cobwebby brain.

 

Primarily I want a cohesive campaign experience. Dynamic campaign with an ah-64, and I want a blackhawk for troop transport missions and coast guard type missions in awful weather. I think my desires can fit into OP's vision of a cohesive DCS so it sounds fine to me.

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

While restrictions are nice there are some things which are inescapable in trying to set up a cold war mission with certain modules mostly in the avionics department with radars 3 generations newer or more...

[Northstar98]

Evoman said:

Let’s not forget that we will be getting a Falklands map in the near future. But the most interesting thing that will be coming out of the Falklands map is some of the period aircraft and assets that are already in development or planned will make the Falklands map the most period correct as possible.

 

Aircraft already in development or planned:

 

A-58 Pucara

Mirage III (or) IAI Dagger (either one, not both)

Dassault Super Etendard

Sea Harrier FRS.1

Indeed, and these aircraft would be great fits as well (though the Falklands map as I understand it is a post Falklands War map, but only just and only really because of RAF Mount Pleasant). The only thing I will say, is that the particular developer in question seems to have a fair bit of stuff to sort on their current modules, so I'm not holding out too much hope personally.

Evoman said:

or me one of the top sought after maps is Vietnam and I didn't even grow up that era.

While Vietnam itself isn't something I'm personally interested in (I'm more into a European Cold War gone hot/Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising scenarios) the aircraft that took part in it, certainly interest me (it's why I love SF2 so much).

And I'm from late 1998, I'm probably one of the youngest on DCS.

Evoman said:

Here are some other aircraft from your list that are currently in development or planned

A-7E – In development by FlyingIron Simulations

A-6E – Planed by Heatblur after they finish with current projects and if they can obtain a license

F-4E – Was stalled but it is in the pipeline once ED finishes up other projects. By recent interviews they stated that they are undecided yet on whether to do just one variant or more.

Edited, I thought that TrueGrit weren't an official 3rd party, so I've now taken the A-7E off of the list.

I'll leave the A-6E on there as it's still unconfirmed (even if it seems likely and as much as I'd love it), and I'll keep the F-4E on there until it properly materialises.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[bies]

While Vietnam itself isn't something I'm personally interested in (I'm more into a European Cold War gone hot/Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising scenarios) the aircraft that took part in it, certainly interest me (it's why I love SF2 so much).

 

I Agree. Truth is European Cold War gone hot was the theater and enviroment which determined the design, weapon system, size, range, kinematic performance etc. of every NATO/WARPAC combat plane since 1950s MiG-15 and Sabre, untill 1980s F-16, F/A-18 and MiG-29, Su-27.

 

During other proxy wars - like Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Iraq-Iran, Afganistan, Gulf War, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, Eritrea-Ethiopia etc. - sides just use planes designed to fight full scale war in Europe and tried to fit them somehow to different particular needs.

[Nodak]

It's a fallacy to think history can be simulated, it never plays out the way you imagine. Want disappointment, hop into a WWII online session in a sim which has an accurate equipment set, people don't compete using someone else's rule book, nor can it ever be enforced by programming.

 

 

I think their on the right track, these modern airframes are important because they have the sales and are attention grabbers, and its forcing them to push the envelope on complex systems behind the curtains. Get that right and whatever modules they crank out after in any era after are going to benefit. The teams are growing and modules are flowing ever faster, maybe part of it is these are modules they want to, and enjoy doing.

 

 

 

Yeah, many of us want a Vietnam/X scenario, but which one? There's a whopping difference between 65 and 73, they're completely different wars. Cold war, what era? If you attempt to focus this sim to a specific period and action, guarantee you've a dismal disaster on your hands, the one thing these type threads prove is we all have drastically differing tastes.

 

 

Just concentrate on building it with greater and ever increasing fidelity, the rewards of doing it right and the interests of the builders is best to drive the direction of maps and modules and thus keep it alive. I'd rather have a platform I personally never had a strong preference for built and programmed by a team who had a passion about it than someone forced to do it looking only at a deadline and a pay check.

Edited October 17, 2020 by Nodak

[Northstar98]

Nodak said:

It's a fallacy to think history can be simulated, it never plays out the way you imagine. Want disappointment, hop into a WWII online session in a sim which has an accurate equipment set, people don't compete using someone else's rule book, nor can it ever be enforced by programming.

All I'm after is equipment that is consistent within say 1-2 decades. To close the generation gap, and hopefully make DCS more cohesive and consistent, instead of being the pick 'n' mix it currently is. I'll say it again, the overwhelming majority of assets are mid-to-late Cold War, the only real exceptions are a select few BLUFOR modules, the JF-17, a few ships and 2 tanks, that's it. The most fleshed out era AFAIK is probably WWII, it has the most numerous number of assets, that occupy a time period to within a decade (but often less).

I don't expect scenarios to play out exactly how they historically played out with no deviations (i.e outcome is already known), I think that's extreme, unfeasible, and perhaps even boring.

I have the Cold War gone hot, from say the early 70s - early 90s, over Europe as my ideal scenario, of something pretty identical to Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising. I'll detail why if you wish.

Nodak said:

I think their on the right track, these modern airframes are important because they have the sales and are attention grabbers, and its forcing them to push the envelope on complex systems behind the curtains. Get that right and whatever modules they crank out after in any era after are going to benefit. The teams are growing and modules are flowing ever faster, maybe part of it is these are modules they want to, and enjoy doing.

It's true that modern aircraft are going to be more popular, heck, I've bought most of them (ED's modules at least). But because of basically every other asset in DCS, I don't feel they fit as well if you wanted to do a historically consistent, peer-to-peer mission (by historically consistent, I mean ±10 years so if we have a module from say 1985, I'd go with anything from 1975 to 1995 and be content with historical consistency). As of right now the latest modules we have on BLUFOR's side reach into at least 2012, as for REDFOR? If we talk about full-fidelity fixed wing, the latest is 1972 with the MiG-21bis.

But also, there's another thing to consider, what modern module are ED going to do next? They've exhausted the teen series (unless they do historical versions), they're very limited with what they can do with fixed wing REDFOR, and as saddening as it is, they're not interested in doing any of the Century series.

Nodak said:

Yeah, many of us want a Vietnam/X scenario, but which one? There's a whopping difference between 65 and 73, they're completely different wars. Cold war, what era? If you attempt to focus this sim to a specific period and action, guarantee you've a dismal disaster on your hands, the one thing these type threads prove is we all have drastically differing tastes.

Again, personally I'd be more than happy with a ±10 year spread, you'd only need to go that far IMO. As for dismal disaster? I beg to differ...

A Cold War gone hot scenario could span the 60s to the 80s easily, a lot of aircraft introduced in the 60s were still operational in the 80s even with peer-to-peer forces. If the assets are there to do both, then that's exactly what I'm after.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting, spelling

[draconus]

They've exhausted the teen series

 

What about the Eagle?

[Top Jockey]

...

 

While Vietnam itself isn't something I'm personally interested in (I'm more into a European Cold War gone hot/Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising scenarios) the aircraft that took part in it, certainly interest me (it's why I love SF2 so much).

 

And I'm from late 1998, I'm probably one of the youngest on DCS.

 

...

 

Same here !

 

SF2: North Atlantic forever ! :thumbup:

[Max1mus]

ED needs to force mission makers to choose a year. Before the coaltions even.

 

Otherwise all scenarios will continue being either modern NATO vs NATO or modern NATO vs glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. And cold war will stay a very niche thing, dominated by F-5 and MiG-21.

[Northstar98]

draconus said:

What about the Eagle?

RAZBAM are doing a more modern F-15E, I don't know what EDs thoughts are on doing a F-15C or earlier (presumably it would be a mid-2000s F-15C), IIRC they weren't interested in it at the moment.

I should've made that more clear.

Max1mus said:

ED needs to force mission makers to choose a year. Before the coaltions even.

 

Otherwise all scenarios will continue being either modern NATO vs NATO or modern NATO vs glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. And cold war will stay a very niche thing, dominated by F-5 and MiG-21.

I think restricting it to a single year is a bit extreme, I think if you pick a year and then go ±10 years I'd be pretty satisfied with that, at least for the Cold War, and I imagine a fair few aircraft within that spread would've been operational among peers.

For instance if you pick the mid-70s, that gives you a spread from the mid-60s to mid-80s. IMO that's plenty, it just narrows the gap, and doesn't really take aircraft out of the era. It's only when you pit the mid-80s stuff up against the mid-60s stuff where you might run into trouble, but less trouble than the up to 40 year gap that we currently have, between fixed-wing full-fidelity REDFOR and BLUFOR.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[Max1mus]

I think restricting it to a single year is a bit extreme, I think if you pick a year and then go ±10 years I'd be pretty satisfied with that, at least for the Cold War, and I imagine a fair few aircraft within that spread would've been operational among peers.

 

If the year is for instance 1984, its 1984. You didnt have weapons from 1994 in 1984, they simply never existed. If you want more aircraft, just pick a later year, instead of a spread with time travelling missiles and bombs.

[Silver_Dragon]

I understand your arguments very well but:

 

We have an A-10C and we recently got the A-10C II. Why didn't ED release an A-10A with a clickable cockpit? Maybe not so many customers interested for the A version than for the most modern one with HMCS, AGM-65L, GBU-54, APKWS. Take a look at my thread from September 2016: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=178575&highlight=A-10A

 

 

The A-10C and A-10C 2 coming from Military trainer Destock to the Air National Guard as easy

to transition from the A-10A, to the A-10C. The ANG get a license to build them with reserves on the "entretainment" market.

 

Meanwhile, the A-10A, F-15C and part of soviet aircrafts has connectors, similarly in a moment on the past was planned a hardcore module with clicleable cockpits, but that never reach.

 

ED has very clear about DCS, a multy-era (WW2 to Present) and land, sea and air simulator. About modules, has plans to a F-4E and others. I dont expected ED making a F/A-18A/C early block or F-16 block 15/30.

[Dragon1-1]

If the year is for instance 1984, its 1984. You didnt have weapons from 1994 in 1984, they simply never existed. If you want more aircraft, just pick a later year, instead of a spread with time travelling missiles and bombs.

 

I think the point was that you can choose anything that came before, as well. Real warfare isn't waged with just the top-line hardware, you'd typically get a few latest designs, with a mix of equipment that's several years out of date comprising the bulk of the force, and a small number of reserves that are a decade or so out of date. It takes a prolonged war, like Vietnam or WWII, for new designs to edge out the older ones in active combat roles.

 

It's already possible to filter aircraft based on year, but currently, it's an option that's buried somewhere in the editor.

[Max1mus]

It's already possible to filter aircraft based on year, but currently, it's an option that's buried somewhere in the editor.

 

Exactly, i cant even find it. ED needs to enforce it at the start of the mission.

[Evoman]

RAZBAM are doing a more modern F-15E, I don't know what EDs thoughts are on doing a F-15C or earlier (presumably it would be a mid-2000s F-15C), IIRC they weren't interested in it at the moment.

 

I should've made that more clear.

 

 

 

ED had replied to a question regarding the F-15C in this interview in question 55 at 1:36:30 that they have no plans at the moment on doing a full fidelity F-15C.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2020 by Evoman

[draconus]

It's already possible to filter aircraft based on year, but currently, it's an option that's buried somewhere in the editor.

 

It's the clock icon on the bottom. Some data is bugged though so don't be mad if you can't find your asset. And it doesn't filter available weapons.