Add possibility to be Boomer (for refueling)

[SharpeXB]

3 minutes ago, Tank50us said:

Any issue. Because the programming isn't perfect, and shit can, and does, happen.

Like what issue?

[Tippis]

9 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

I don’t understand

Your understanding isn't particularly relevant, though.

If you don't get it, don't do it. It's pretty trivial to see how and why this could add more dimensions to the game.

 

6 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Like what issue?

Like the AI's unwavering willingness to endanger itself and the pilots using the tanker.

 

Oh and…

9 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

And again this role in DCS would be way too boring for any player to actually want to do

…this is very clearly incorrect. Your opinions and tastes are not universal — don't try to generalise what “people” will do based on what bores or entertains you.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Tippis

[maxTRX]

7 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Sure DCS could be more realistic...

 

 

LOL, tier1 wearhouse ops... I'm actually not surprised. Lots of weird stuff is happening in some parts of the world yhese days.  SFOD D, SEALs, raiders, combat controllers?  How about some more peaceful environment where we can chat about usual, mundane stuff...

Actually, in some online groups it is about chatting and socializing... oh well, could be fun too. If I was stuck with being a boom operator in a flight sim (nothing to do with RL folks) I'd just put it on auto (AI) and chat away...

[Furiz]

16 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

Haven't you just described basically every realistic mission?

 

 

 

In a fighter you plan your route, aviod enemy SAMs etc etc... as a boomer you sit in a blue zone and absolutely nothing is happening.

 

7 hours ago, Tank50us said:

 (and, potentially, fix issues that arise).

 

What issues? There is nothing wrong with the tanker, only confused players that miss the freq, or fail the comms procedure.

 

Bottom line is, that time can be spent on more pressing matters than a boom operator.

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, Furiz said:

In a fighter you plan your route

 

Very exciting stuff that is usually done by the mission editor before start anyway...

 

Quote

aviod enemy SAMs etc etc...

 

Ahh gotcha, moving the stick a little to the left or a little to the right when I hear a beeping noise.

 

Quote

as a boomer you sit in a blue zone and absolutely nothing is happening.

 

Remind what I'm doing during ingress and egress? Something that takes the most amount of time in a realistic mission?

Edited April 11, 2021 by Northstar98

[Furiz]

4 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

 

Very exciting stuff that is usually done by the mission editor before start anyway...

 

 

Ahh gotcha, moving the stick a little to the left or a little to the right when I hear a beeping noise

 

 

Remind what I'm doing during ingress and egress? Something that takes the most amount of time in a realistic mission?

 

 

So as I understand from this post of yours, you are playing a game that is boring to you, and you want even more boredom by sitting in a boomer spot for hours not even moving the stick to adjust the course?

 

 

[Northstar98]

18 minutes ago, Furiz said:

So as I understand from this post of yours, you are playing a game that is boring to you, and you want even more boredom by sitting in a boomer spot for hours not even moving the stick to adjust the course?

 

Nah, just trying to smoke out the irony...

 

And as far as not moving the stick for ages goes, you wanna take a look at this?

 

 

I mean I'm not even super interested in this myself, but it is quite entertaining seeing the foot stomping being done by SharpeXB in particular.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Northstar98

[Tank50us]

2 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

Nah, just trying to smoke out the irony...

 

And as far as not moving the stick for ages goes, you wanna take a look at this?

 

 

I mean I'm not even super interested in this myself, but it is quite entertaining seeing the foot stomping being done by SharpeXB in particular.

 

And hey, that's your right. If you're not interested, odds are, you wouldn't buy into it (figuratively speaking ofc). But I get the feeling that you wouldn't stop someone from doing so either, especially if it's a long mission and they 'died' to a bull-shit SAM that should've missed (and let's face it, who HASN'T been there?). It gives those people something to do rather than just watch aircraft fly around as they wait for everyone to RTB and debrief. Something they can already do now with the LSO station on the SCM, where you're technically doing even less than a boom operator in a tanker.

And as I've mentioned before yee haters, the response to the Super Herc does show that there are people who want to do more in DCS than fly fighter jets. Why shouldn't they be catered to as well? My units upcoming campaign has plenty for those pilots to do. Delivering supplies to FOBs, 'evacuating' wounded troops, deploying fresh troops and equipment, recovering downed pilots.... there's plenty of options just in this upcoming campaign we're running for non-combat pilots to do. Not trying advertise btw, just trying to make a point. There's more to DCS than just flying planes that make things blow up. And there's nothing wrong with people who want to fly a tanker, AWACS, cargo aircraft, or transport helo. I mean heck, there's people that have the option of flying F-22s and F-35s right now who decide instead to fly the C-130 or KC-10. Or those in the Army who have the option and qualifications to fly the AH64, but instead choose the CH47. And on that last one... I don't think anyone would say their job is boring.... not when some of them have balls that exceed the MTO of a C-5 like this guy did:
 

Oh, and let's not forget that Tanker pilots have put themselves at extreme risk to get friendly pilots home. There's a few examples that come to mind that've been portrayed by some talented artists....

 

The story for the KA3B pictured there can be read here by the way. My JROTC Commander in High School told us of a story where an AWACS warned him of incoming Migs... and this absolute madlad of a pilot took the thing down to the deck, and nearly red-lined the engines to one of our CVBGs operating near by. The Migs bugged out (likely due to some angry Phantoms coming for them), but still. Life for a tanker isn't always dull.

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, Tank50us said:

And hey, that's your right. If you're not interested, odds are, you wouldn't buy into it (figuratively speaking ofc). But I get the feeling that you wouldn't stop someone from doing so either, especially if it's a long mission and they 'died' to a bull-shit SAM that should've missed (and let's face it, who HASN'T been there?). It gives those people something to do rather than just watch aircraft fly around as they wait for everyone to RTB and debrief. Something they can already do now with the LSO station on the SCM, where you're technically doing even less than a boom operator in a tanker.

 

Exactly! While I'm not interested in it myself, I'm not going to stop somebody from playing as whatever they want to - if you want to be a boom operator that's fine, that's entirely up to you to decide.

 

Chances are most of my missions (which are 90% free flight where I don't do anything) are things people would find boring, I usually do full start-up procedures where I can but in terms of combat I actually do very little - though mostly that's due to my less than ideal set-up.

 

I'd happily try and do a Black Buck One mission for instance and most of that is sitting around for hours not doing anything. 

 

Quote

And as I've mentioned before yee haters, the response to the Super Herc does show that there are people who want to do more in DCS than fly fighter jets. Why shouldn't they be catered to as well? My units upcoming campaign has plenty for those pilots to do. Delivering supplies to FOBs, 'evacuating' wounded troops, deploying fresh troops and equipment, recovering downed pilots.... there's plenty of options just in this upcoming campaign we're running for non-combat pilots to do.

 

Exactly, and I'd be interested in logistics missions, and it is still a part of combat, just not directly.

 

Quote

Not trying advertise btw, just trying to make a point. There's more to DCS than just flying planes that make things blow up. And there's nothing wrong with people who want to fly a tanker, AWACS, cargo aircraft, or transport helo. I mean heck, there's people that have the option of flying F-22s and F-35s right now who decide instead to fly the C-130 or KC-10. Or those in the Army who have the option and qualifications to fly the AH64, but instead choose the CH47. And on that last one... I don't think anyone would say their job is boring.... not when some of them have balls that exceed the MTO of a C-5 like this guy did:

 

Abso-freaking-lutely!

Edited April 11, 2021 by Northstar98

[SharpeXB]

5 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

I mean I'm not even super interested in this myself, but it is quite entertaining seeing the foot stomping being done by SharpeXB in particular.

I’m still wondering exactly what anyone thinks a human operator would do in this role that the AI can’t do...

[Tippis]

19 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I’m still wondering exactly what anyone thinks a human operator would do in this role that the AI can’t do...

This has already been answered.

Try reading the thread.

 

If that doesn't work for you, try thinking for more than zero seconds.

What is it that a player can do in a player-controlled position that they can't do in an AI-controlled position. Hmm… Hmmmm… HMMMMMMM…

Truly a mystery for the ages.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Tippis

[Northstar98]

22 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I’m still wondering exactly what anyone thinks a human operator would do in this role that the AI can’t do...

 

Can't you apply that literally everywhere in DCS? Including to current playable roles?

Edited April 11, 2021 by Northstar98

[SharpeXB]

12 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

 

Can't you apply that literally everywhere in DCS? Including to current playable roles?

 

The AIs role in the tanker isn’t very complicated. IMO it’s not interesting enough for a human player but that’s just me. 
But other people are trying to justify this role by stating that this task is too complex for the AI or that the AI makes errors or mistakes. I’m curious to know exactly what those errors are. 

[Tippis]

12 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

The AIs role in the tanker isn’t very complicated. IMO it’s not interesting enough for a human player but that’s just me. 

So you are still arguing against this idea… why, exactly? Your lack of interest is still entirely irrelevant.

Also, why are you avoiding the question?

 

Quote

But other people are trying to justify this role by stating that this task is too complex for the AI or that the AI makes errors or mistakes

No. That's just something you made up.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Tippis

[Tippis]

12 minutes ago, Desert Fox said:

If this was integrated into Combined Arms for example: If folks want to sit in the back of a tanker and refuel planes while there is nothing up as a JTAC right now, what exactly is the issue?

In fact, there is a good bunch of knobs and switches in there and it would make a good "mini-module" simulating that. I'd be really interested. Plus some nice player interaction (distance comms "30, 20, 10" and some small talk) for AAR. Managing flights and aircraft is another task. Lot's of interesting and demanding things in there.

That's really the ultimate answer to all of this: what can a player do that an AI can't? Communicate. Coordinate. Play with others.

 

There's a reason why everyone is much happier with someone on LotTAC (or, hell, just someone watching the F10 map) rather than having to rely on the horrible AWAC/GCI communication from the AI. Or when someone can actually properly select and lase targets (with variable laser codes) as a CA ground unit rather than rely on the horrible static, stupid, glitchy, and generally horrible JTAC AI. Or when someone on LotATC (again… and again possibly just watching the F10 map) can do proper traffic deconfliction and guidance rather than rely on the AI's useless attempts at ATC. Even just basic ground combat in CA lets you pull off feats of targeting and coordination that the AI can only dream of, simply by virtue of being able to communicate and coordinate with others. The AI can aim better, but good luck making it see targets soon enough for that to matter.

 

And the beauty of it is that there's rarely a dull moment taking on this because you can pretty trivially and seamlessly flip between the roles, which you technically can in aircraft as well, but it usually causes… problems.

[SharpeXB]

43 minutes ago, Desert Fox said:

If this was integrated into Combined Arms for example: If folks want to sit in the back of a tanker and refuel planes while there is nothing up as a JTAC right now, what exactly is the issue?

The issue is that it would take up ED’s scarce resources to create content that IMO very few people would use.

If a third party or modder created this, that would be better. And there’s really no need for a human boom operator. The AI can do that job just fine. 

Edited April 11, 2021 by SharpeXB

[maxTRX]

16 hours ago, Tank50us said:

I'm not saying a full module though, I'm saying make it part of Combined Arms, so that a player can take control if they want to (and, potentially, fix issues that arise). A full module would be a hard sell. Not impossible obviously (I mean, look at the response to the Super Herc mod), but it would be a hard sell. But, making it part of CA would mean that those people who have it now get more options, especially if controlling other cargo aircraft was part of it (some people actually do like doing cargo runs, at least 8 people who joined my unit did so specifically because they want to fly the Herc in a campaign). So, there is certainly a market for doing more in a MilAirSim than just making things blow up.

Since you mentioned JTAC/GCI/AWACS... definitely would change the game. The boom op. could probably be piggybacked to that module.   I'm not sure what CA offers already. I can't use it anyway since I'm a VR freak.

[MAXsenna]

The issue is that it would take up ED’s scarce resources to create content that IMO very few people would use.
If a third party or modder created this, that would be better. And there’s really no need for a human boom operator. The AI can do that job just fine. 

I agree. I understand why some would like to fly a tanker/be the boom. But I believe it would be better coming from modders/third parties. I might love the feature myself, but I'd prefer bug and AI fixes.
Cheers!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Tippis]

5 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

The issue is that it would take up ED’s scarce resources to create content that IMO very few people would use.

 By that logic, nothing should ever be added to DCS other than maybe the teen fighters that it already has. But we… well… have those, so now it's just a matter of which “content that very few people would use” that is next on the list, because they pretty much all qualify.

 

2 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

I agree. I understand why some would like to fly a tanker/be the boom. But I believe it would be better coming from modders/third parties. I might love the feature myself, but I'd prefer bug and AI fixes.

They don't really compete, though.

For one, this would require a few AI fixes to take priority to make the thing work properly. For another, bug and AI fixes generally aren't what limits ED from rolling out new modules — it would compete against those more than anything. Granted, the massive delays in the Viper in favour of limping over the finishing line with the Hornet suggests that something like the Supercarrier would be a more likely subject for blocking (or being blocked by) this kind of feature.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Tippis

[MAXsenna]

They don't really compete, though.
For one, this would require a few AI fixes to take priority to make the thing work properly. For another, bug and AI fixes generally aren't what limits ED from rolling out new modules — it would compete against those more than anything. Granted, the massive delays in the Viper in favour of limping over the finishing line with the Hornet suggests that something like the Supercarrier would be a more likely subject for blocking (or being blocked by) this kind of feature.

You're right. Just having a bad day of stupid wingmen committing suicide when ordered to attack from a hover.
When I come to think of it, I would love to purchase a full fidelity multistationed tanker somehow integrated into the system, so one could enter it at anytime, wether SP or MP.
Cheers!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Nodak]

It would be a nice feature to have a boomer view camera position as a minimum.