Jump to content

BS3 still happening?


ResonantCard1

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, IkarusC42B Pilot said:

How should i know?

ED didn't mention anything else than "new datalink features"? As I don't recall those at all, why asking that what I have missed.

 

 

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A simple solution will be adding an options for Bs3, so players can enable or disable the third pylons or additional features in BS3. We won't be able to get the exact modern Ka-50 within next 10 years at least. in this case, as long as ED remain the original ka-50, and upgrade the textures and models, I will just buy BS3.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, pokmnnjiuhb said:

in this case, as long as ED remain the original ka-50, and upgrade the textures and models, I will just buy BS3.

 

Exactly this. I will gladly pay for an upgrade just for an updated model, textures and perhaps some additional cockpit functionality and bug fixes, only if I can disable the additional capabilities (3 pylons and MWS). This could work in the same way that you remove the pylons and additional armour for the Mi-8 module. Or it could be in the modules 'special options' tab.

 

Ideally, I'd like to fly a Ka-50 as it was used in Chechnya without additional bells and whistles. And I'd like to see Eagle Dynamics most polished and accurate work on it.

  • Like 8

Valve Index | RTX 3070 Ti (Mobile) | i7-12700H @ 2.7GHz | 16GB RAM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/5/2021 at 2:33 AM, martinistripes said:

 

Exactly this. I will gladly pay for an upgrade just for an updated model, textures and perhaps some additional cockpit functionality and bug fixes, only if I can disable the additional capabilities (3 pylons and MWS). This could work in the same way that you remove the pylons and additional armour for the Mi-8 module. Or it could be in the modules 'special options' tab.

 

Ideally, I'd like to fly a Ka-50 as it was used in Chechnya without additional bells and whistles. And I'd like to see Eagle Dynamics most polished and accurate work on it.

Is there any way to let the ED notice this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/5/2021 at 1:33 AM, martinistripes said:

 

Exactly this. I will gladly pay for an upgrade just for an updated model, textures and perhaps some additional cockpit functionality and bug fixes, only if I can disable the additional capabilities (3 pylons and MWS). This could work in the same way that you remove the pylons and additional armour for the Mi-8 module. Or it could be in the modules 'special options' tab.

 

Ideally, I'd like to fly a Ka-50 as it was used in Chechnya without additional bells and whistles. And I'd like to see Eagle Dynamics most polished and accurate work on it.

Just don't mount vhikers and turn the MWS off.  Now your right back to BS2.

If the MWS is like the A-10C, I'll be turning it off as well.  Useless in a packed battlefield.  Only good if your out in the middle of nowhere and someone tries to ambush you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

personally i've always loved the ka50 for what it is, and i just wish ED could get long standing bugs and incomplete systems finally fixed. if that comes with a nice facelift and means i have to contribute a small upgrade price, that's fine.

 

and:

On 5/2/2021 at 9:14 AM, martinistripes said:

we can always play offline in a realistic manner and, we can create or search for realistic online servers that exclude certain units or loadouts.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, 3WA said:

Just don't mount vhikers and turn the MWS off.  Now your right back to BS2.

If the MWS is like the A-10C, I'll be turning it off as well.  Useless in a packed battlefield.  Only good if your out in the middle of nowhere and someone tries to ambush you.

 

The whole MWS kit in KA-50 was to be a part of the President-S system that has the "smartness" in it, to make a threat assessment for each launch. So when a launch is detected (the UV sensors are well capable to detect launches past 200 km even if environmental conditions applies, so they are very sensitive) the system tries to categorize it to "Cannon Fire" or "Small Arms Fire" and "Missile Launch" kind a way. And then if the threat is coming toward the helicopter, it will only then make the warning and track the threat for automatic counter measurement program at proper distance (so it will not launch flares on missile launch at 6 km distance but wait it to fly at 200-300 meters or so). 

 

If we do not get that "intelligence" then it would just be wasting flares on friendly launches next to you, for someone just firing a cannon at some distance and be blinking to every heat source there will be. 

 

Then it totally is reasonable to disable the whole sensor suite as you say, if you are not middle of nowhere. And what use it is if would get a single light lit up for warning, if the missile can hit you in any second from any direction without having any idea?

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Fri13 said:

(the UV sensors are well capable to detect launches past 200 km even if environmental conditions applies, so they are very sensitive)

Maybe a ICBM launch at 100km.

 

12 hours ago, 3WA said:

If the MWS is like the A-10C, I'll be turning it off as well.  Useless in a packed battlefield.  Only good if your out in the middle of nowhere and someone tries to ambush you.

The MWS will cue you to check for launch smoke. Currently, without MWS, I have to scan for launch smoke constantly and only glance down at the IT-23 to target identify. 

 

11 hours ago, HILOK said:

personally i've always loved the ka50 for what it is, and i just wish ED could get long standing bugs and incomplete systems finally fixed. if that comes with a nice facelift and means i have to contribute a small upgrade price, that's fine.

I would pay $20 just to have an intern change a few constants in the shkval lock code.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can clearly see there're 2 types of people playing DCS: those who all they want is capabilities to better strip clean whole maps in a single sortie, and those who care about realism and the more "simulator" aspects of the game. It's actually sad to see to whom Eagle Dynamics is starting to cater now. 

I personally fly in DCS for the prospect of flying a reallistic depiction of a certain aircraft. Sure, having Iglas would be nice. Sure, having FLIR would be nice. Sure, having Amraams would be nice. But if those are going to be unreallistic, fantasy add-ons glued to the airframe just to make it more capable for capabilities or sales, then don't count with me on that one. If I wanted to have a power fantasy I'd go play War Thunder or Ace Combat, DCS simply isn't that. And now we're having that pushed down our throats, and judging by how ED handles the Datalink and JHMCS on the Hornet and the Viper to adapt them to scenarios in which they didn't have them (ie: they don't), we can only assume the 3rd pylons are going to be a permanent attachment and all that. So yeah, a net negative to DCS in my opinion. I hope we get Amraams, JDAMs and JSOWs on the Apache too.

  • Like 6

Main: MiG-21bis, because pocket rockets are fun

 

Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For sure Flir is not on the table for BS3. 

There is a lot more capability on the shark 3 than I thought there would be..... but I think I could learn to live with it. 🙂

 

The Apache will clear the map of hostiles, in the right hands, and in the right weather and in the right team.... it will clear the map. FCR hell fire ripple fire will be horrific. We have simply never seen it before IRL. kuwait highway to iraq was terrible slaughter... but no ripple fire.

 

BS3 will still be slow in its primary role, its missiles faster but delivery slower and per target.

Nothing really unbalanced here, more trying to catch up with the future.

 


Edited by Rogue Trooper
  • Like 2

HP G2 Reverb, Windows 10 VR settings: IPD is 64.5mm, High image quality, G2 reset to 60Hz refresh rate as standard. OpenXR user, Open XR tool kit disabled. Open XR was a massive upgrade for me.

DCS: Pixel Density 1.0, Forced IPD at 55 (perceived world size), 0 X MSAA, 0 X SSAA. My real IPD is 64.5mm. Prescription VROptition lenses installed. VR Driver system: I9-9900KS 5Ghz CPU. XI Hero motherboard and RTX 3090 graphics card, 64 gigs Ram, No OC at the mo. MT user  (2 - 5 fps gain). DCS run at 60Hz.

Vaicom user. Thrustmaster warthog user. MFG pedals with damper upgrade.... and what an upgrade! Total controls Apache MPDs set to virtual Reality height with brail enhancements to ensure 100% button activation in VR.. Simshaker Jet Pro vibration seat.. Uses data from DCS not sound.... you know when you are dropping into VRS with this bad boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is only because the AI can't defend themselves.   Obscurants and other battlefield conditions should prevent this but in DCS none of this is simulated.   And at any rate, it is in theory no different than someone dropping a load of SFWs on a dense tank formation, which is also the only realistically viable use for this sort of hellfire ripple firing.


Edited by GGTharos
  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SFWs?

The Apache attacking an area of tanks was its primary design, other war scenarios just happen to be handy for the Apaches capabilities.

The "other" scenarios have somewhat hijacked the true intent of the Apache, but it's true thoroughbred tank killer instinct not only still exists.... but it is improved.


Edited by Rogue Trooper
  • Like 2

HP G2 Reverb, Windows 10 VR settings: IPD is 64.5mm, High image quality, G2 reset to 60Hz refresh rate as standard. OpenXR user, Open XR tool kit disabled. Open XR was a massive upgrade for me.

DCS: Pixel Density 1.0, Forced IPD at 55 (perceived world size), 0 X MSAA, 0 X SSAA. My real IPD is 64.5mm. Prescription VROptition lenses installed. VR Driver system: I9-9900KS 5Ghz CPU. XI Hero motherboard and RTX 3090 graphics card, 64 gigs Ram, No OC at the mo. MT user  (2 - 5 fps gain). DCS run at 60Hz.

Vaicom user. Thrustmaster warthog user. MFG pedals with damper upgrade.... and what an upgrade! Total controls Apache MPDs set to virtual Reality height with brail enhancements to ensure 100% button activation in VR.. Simshaker Jet Pro vibration seat.. Uses data from DCS not sound.... you know when you are dropping into VRS with this bad boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Redfor CAP lets one of these Apaches onto the front line.

Just one apache, multi crewed and loaded with 16 Hell fires, It will either bring a mechanised attack to a grinding halt or seriously drop its effectiveness to attack or defend its gains.

 

There is nothing special in the BS3 ED proposes... it is simply holding on with its fingertips to some sort of balance.

 

The Bogey man is coming.

 

 

  • Like 1

HP G2 Reverb, Windows 10 VR settings: IPD is 64.5mm, High image quality, G2 reset to 60Hz refresh rate as standard. OpenXR user, Open XR tool kit disabled. Open XR was a massive upgrade for me.

DCS: Pixel Density 1.0, Forced IPD at 55 (perceived world size), 0 X MSAA, 0 X SSAA. My real IPD is 64.5mm. Prescription VROptition lenses installed. VR Driver system: I9-9900KS 5Ghz CPU. XI Hero motherboard and RTX 3090 graphics card, 64 gigs Ram, No OC at the mo. MT user  (2 - 5 fps gain). DCS run at 60Hz.

Vaicom user. Thrustmaster warthog user. MFG pedals with damper upgrade.... and what an upgrade! Total controls Apache MPDs set to virtual Reality height with brail enhancements to ensure 100% button activation in VR.. Simshaker Jet Pro vibration seat.. Uses data from DCS not sound.... you know when you are dropping into VRS with this bad boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Rogue Trooper said:

SFWs?

The Apache attacking an area of tanks was its primary design, other war scenarios just happen to be handy for the Apaches capabilities.

The "other" scenarios have somewhat hijacked the true intent of the Apache, but it's true thoroughbred tank killer instinct not only still exists.... it is improved.

 

Sensor Fuzed weapons, think CBU-97.

And I think you've overestimating the radar's capabilities IMHO, everything is 'easy' in DCS because everything is always perfect.  And it will probably be just like that - like I said, there are no battlefield realities to help out the 'targets', there's no possible camouflage, no scores of cars showing up, no defensive measures at all being taken by said targets.

 

Anyway, this is about the Black Shark, which can frankly sit there hovering outside of SHORAD range and eliminate all kinds of armor and vehicles with relative impunity as is, with the vehicles being sitting ducks for the same reasons as above.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ResonantCard1 said:

We can clearly see there're 2 types of people playing DCS: those who all they want is capabilities to better strip clean whole maps in a single sortie, and those who care about realism and the more "simulator" aspects of the game. It's actually sad to see to whom Eagle Dynamics is starting to cater now. 

I personally fly in DCS for the prospect of flying a reallistic depiction of a certain aircraft. Sure, having Iglas would be nice. Sure, having FLIR would be nice. Sure, having Amraams would be nice. But if those are going to be unreallistic, fantasy add-ons glued to the airframe just to make it more capable for capabilities or sales, then don't count with me on that one. If I wanted to have a power fantasy I'd go play War Thunder or Ace Combat, DCS simply isn't that. And now we're having that pushed down our throats, and judging by how ED handles the Datalink and JHMCS on the Hornet and the Viper to adapt them to scenarios in which they didn't have them (ie: they don't), we can only assume the 3rd pylons are going to be a permanent attachment and all that. So yeah, a net negative to DCS in my opinion. I hope we get Amraams, JDAMs and JSOWs on the Apache too.

Lol, you're mixing stuff up.  The Ka-50 is a literal experiment.  We'll probably never know exactly what it could carry or it's functions.  Looking at the Ka-52, which was made from it's experiments, we can have an educated guess.  The other aircraft, yes, except for a few small secret details, we know them.  For instance, though the Apache is airframe capable of carrying stingers, the US Army version, which it is modeled after, already carries CMWS on the wingtip there, and the cockpit has been changed to accommodate it.  So, if we wanted that capability, we would have to model an export variant.  I too wish to stick to realism.  And yeah, there has been some fudging, like you can load 3 Mavericks on each pylon on the A-10, even though in reality, it will end up burning the tires.  Maybe there should be some realism tick boxes in the setup ( most players probably aren't even aware of these limitations ).  I hear there are some issues with the Viper and the FA-18 as well, such as carrying AMRAAMS on pylons that aren't normally wired for it, but I don't know that aircraft, so I cant' comment on it.

As for the Ka-50, I view it as an experiment, and a weak one at that, so I'm not too worried about what they do with it.  I'm probably going to switch over to the Apache, which is more capable anyway.

9 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

...in DCS because everything is always perfect.  And it will probably be just like that - like I said, there are no battlefield realities to help out the 'targets', there's no possible camouflage, no scores of cars showing up, no defensive measures at all being taken by said targets.

And this is why people like me want more attention payed to the Ground.  It's too simple down there.  If DCS is going to start building more heli's, we need a better Ground environment.

As for the SHORAD, it's amazing how there is no air defenses in MASSES of tanks on the Ground.  For instance, in the mission BATTLE, for the Ka-50, the only air defense on the ground is one self-propelled Vulcan.  It's a joke.  I'm not an expert on tank formations, but you would think they would have something more than that guarding a massive tank formation against air attack.


Edited by 3WA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

 

Sensor Fuzed weapons, think CBU-97.

And I think you've overestimating the radar's capabilities IMHO, everything is 'easy' in DCS because everything is always perfect.  And it will probably be just like that - like I said, there are no battlefield realities to help out the 'targets', there's no possible camouflage, no scores of cars showing up, no defensive measures at all being taken by said targets.

 

Anyway, this is about the Black Shark, which can frankly sit there hovering outside of SHORAD range and eliminate all kinds of armor and vehicles with relative impunity as is, with the vehicles being sitting ducks for the same reasons as above.

Thanks for the Sensor Fuzed Weapon description.

Yeah but this is DCS, not real life. It is what we have.

Every on line game I join is crystal clear blue skies.... it is only since the new clouds has this changed.

When DCS is capable of being real life I will cheer loud..... But even then, the capabilities of the machine will still shine through.

For sure BS3 will do a lot better in the modern combat scenario, with range, missile speed and defensive abilities. 


Edited by Rogue Trooper
  • Like 1

HP G2 Reverb, Windows 10 VR settings: IPD is 64.5mm, High image quality, G2 reset to 60Hz refresh rate as standard. OpenXR user, Open XR tool kit disabled. Open XR was a massive upgrade for me.

DCS: Pixel Density 1.0, Forced IPD at 55 (perceived world size), 0 X MSAA, 0 X SSAA. My real IPD is 64.5mm. Prescription VROptition lenses installed. VR Driver system: I9-9900KS 5Ghz CPU. XI Hero motherboard and RTX 3090 graphics card, 64 gigs Ram, No OC at the mo. MT user  (2 - 5 fps gain). DCS run at 60Hz.

Vaicom user. Thrustmaster warthog user. MFG pedals with damper upgrade.... and what an upgrade! Total controls Apache MPDs set to virtual Reality height with brail enhancements to ensure 100% button activation in VR.. Simshaker Jet Pro vibration seat.. Uses data from DCS not sound.... you know when you are dropping into VRS with this bad boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2021 at 11:28 PM, ResonantCard1 said:

We can clearly see there're 2 types of people playing DCS: those who all they want is capabilities to better strip clean whole maps in a single sortie, and those who care about realism and the more "simulator" aspects of the game. It's actually sad to see to whom Eagle Dynamics is starting to cater now. 

I personally fly in DCS for the prospect of flying a reallistic depiction of a certain aircraft. Sure, having Iglas would be nice. Sure, having FLIR would be nice. Sure, having Amraams would be nice. But if those are going to be unreallistic, fantasy add-ons glued to the airframe just to make it more capable for capabilities or sales, then don't count with me on that one. If I wanted to have a power fantasy I'd go play War Thunder or Ace Combat, DCS simply isn't that. And now we're having that pushed down our throats, and judging by how ED handles the Datalink and JHMCS on the Hornet and the Viper to adapt them to scenarios in which they didn't have them (ie: they don't), we can only assume the 3rd pylons are going to be a permanent attachment and all that. So yeah, a net negative to DCS in my opinion. I hope we get Amraams, JDAMs and JSOWs on the Apache too.

 

if DCS were an actual simulator then the ka-50 and su-25t wouldn't be in the game at all

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2021 at 9:46 PM, GGTharos said:

everything is 'easy' in DCS because everything is always perfect.  And it will probably be just like that - like I said, there are no battlefield realities to help out the 'targets', there's no possible camouflage, no scores of cars showing up, no defensive measures at all being taken by said targets.

 

On 5/10/2021 at 9:48 PM, 3WA said:

And this is why people like me want more attention payed to the Ground.  It's too simple down there.  If DCS is going to start building more heli's, we need a better Ground environment.

 

Exactly. And this is why i wish for a official dynamic campaign for DCS, but we need better AI for that. In fact we probably need 3 different types of AI working as one.

 

1st  AI to perform battlefield managment reacting/creating missions for players/other AI according to what is happening on the map

2nd AI managing aircraft that behaves in a different way in BVR and WVR

3rd AI for ground units, which next to the first option is the most needed one i think

 

Imagine a scenario, where we have all those. You are flying a Ka-50, NOE, all is going well. You get to the IP and start searching for targets, you see that fat abrams, lock him up, lase him and puff, he pops smoke because his laser warning reciever told him that someone is lasing him. All the other tanks disperse looking for cover. And you know that recon showed AA elements in the area but they have long switched possitions. Intel is no longer 100% accurate. Meanwhile the AI knows you are there and scrambled fighters from the nearby airfield to search for you...

 

Time is ticking, you still have a job to do. No more easy shooting range.

 

This is just one of potential scenarios, and the lack if Dynamic Campaign is the reason why i stick to single player content most of the time, or Blue Flag servers. Sure, its scripted for the aircraft, but at least it gives some degree of how it should work. However it is, far from "perfect..."

 

And as for the "what can carry what" thing, and additional pylons for the Ka-50 that he probably never had. Not sure what to think about it. But i do know that if we had living and changing battlefield environment, it would not make much of a difference. Simply because you would have to put at least some attantion on what the loadout should be, depending on the AI generated mission for you. And i think this would be the thing that would force virtual pilots to think more about realistic loadouts than frankenloadouts. 

 

Just my 2 cents.

 


Edited by Mr.Scar
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/7/2021 at 8:50 PM, IronChancellor said:

Maybe a ICBM launch at 100km.

 

That is bad joke, as ICBM launch at 100 km is equal to MANPADS launch at 1 km range.

 

The point is, the UV MWS systems are not weak, they are not blind and they are not "see, the huge missile was launched at 5 km". 

The sensors are very sensitive. Everyone who have used NVG alone at the night knows how a cicarette is visible to kilometers. When someone shoots with just assault rifles it is like light show going on the ground from star wars even when you are kilometers away.

 

The UV spectrum is not less than what is visible or near IR light. You get even more sensitive there. Question is how high resolution you can get and how good software you get to detect and recognize launches, track them and identify them to be a threat to you. 

 

On 5/7/2021 at 8:50 PM, IronChancellor said:

The MWS will cue you to check for launch smoke. Currently, without MWS, I have to scan for launch smoke constantly and only glance down at the IT-23 to target identify. 

 

Well that is always better than nothing, but only if you get the direction of it. As if there is no intelligence, then the MWS will be like a A-10C one that just blinks a small red LED that you don't even notice and just waste your flares even when it was a MBT just firing its gun at 5 km from your location. And when there is a platoon of them firing their cannons, your flares are consumed faster than you get to notice that what is happening. So you simply disable the automatic system all together. Then you need to be careful as any friendly or hostile firing around you just trigger the sensor and you are constantly looking around that if it happened to be a missile at that time. So you just turn that whole system down as it is useless as false alarms are 10000:1 to real threat. 

 

That is the beauty of these new modern systems like President-S that the system recognizes, classifies and tracks each threat automatically, and if they are non-threats like cannon fire or so, they don't even give you the warning. If it is a missile launch then you get silent warning and if it happens to be a threat to you (heading to you) then you get as best early warning possible so you know is it at 8 km or 4 km distance, what is the direction of it and what is the missile estimated range to you, so you can perform evasive maneuver or manually do something, and in final moments if you have not done anything, then the system will wait missile to fly at proper effective range from you and will trigger counter measurements automatically to proper side and start the IR/RF jamming without pilot actions. 

 

If we don't even get a smartness that "Hey, a real missile threat at 9'clock" then it will be almost useless.

 

On 5/7/2021 at 8:50 PM, IronChancellor said:

I would pay $20 just to have an intern change a few constants in the shkval lock code.

 

I would pay full 79 for the actual working contrast lock system for core of DCS World. So that all systems would actually get a proper optical benefits and challenges. (No, I wouldn't pay extra for that as DCS World should have it already for free for all modules API to begin with, just like the radar, FLIR, NVG etc functionality should be for all modules available there). 

 

Personally I would be happy to get the proper Shkval filters and functions available, and then Vikhr modeled properly so you could actually get it used well against air threats as well be able lock on it strong contrast targets without problems. And live with the contrast tracking system problems elsewhere where you get it locking to unwanted things and it lose lock on moving targets when being blocked by something else etc. You would get the challenge and learn to live with the real contrast lock systems in good and bad. 

 

 

  • Like 3

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fri13 said:

but only if you get the direction of it.

Even without the direction I can still scan for launch smoke.

 

3 hours ago, Fri13 said:

And when there is a platoon of them firing their cannons, your flares are consumed faster than you get to notice that what is happening.

A firearm discharge is a brief flash of UV light. A missile in flight is a continuous emmision. Also you can use the MWS without giving it control of countermeasures.

 

3 hours ago, Fri13 said:

So you just turn that whole system down as it is useless as false alarms are 10000:1 to real threat. 

I currently scan about once a second. If the system goes off every three seconds then that's a major improvement.

 

3 hours ago, Fri13 said:

I would pay full 79...

I don't see how this paragraph relates to the qoute above it?

 

3 hours ago, Fri13 said:

Personally I would be happy...

Personally I would be happy if ED made a full fidelity Su-24 module. /s

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Fri13 said:

I would pay full 79 for the actual working contrast lock system for core of DCS World. So that all systems would actually get a proper optical benefits and challenges. (No, I wouldn't pay extra for that as DCS World should have it already for free for all modules API to begin with, just like the radar, FLIR, NVG etc functionality should be for all modules available there). 

 

Personally I would be happy to get the proper Shkval filters and functions available, and then Vikhr modeled properly so you could actually get it used well against air threats as well be able lock on it strong contrast targets without problems. And live with the contrast tracking system problems elsewhere where you get it locking to unwanted things and it lose lock on moving targets when being blocked by something else etc. You would get the challenge and learn to live with the real contrast lock systems in good and bad. 

 

 

 

Yeah, ED needs to spend some serious time "improving" or developing the various API's

 

A/A radar needs work, in terms of not behaving like a magical AESA radar, and having "high quality" instant trackfiles the moment the radar scans over the target the first time. There need to be benefits and drawbacks of various modes like STT vs TWS modeled. RCS needs to modeled based on aspect and weapons carried (hey, turns out there is another sim thats done all this for YEARS)... And there needs to be some reasonable "rank" ordering of various radar systems in game, not just going by some inflated brochure numbers.

 

I can't comment on the "shiny new" FLIR API, but I hope to god it models MWIR vs LWIR differences, Diurnal cycles, atmospheric absorption (i.e. water/humidty/clouds/raid), IR reflections/emissivity and not just assuming everything is blackbody. And then actually models things like sensor resolution. TBH most of this applies to all the visual sensors in various ways.

 

And yeah, the holy grail of contrast lock and the 3 compute cycles that would take... 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

 

Yeah, ED needs to spend some serious time "improving" or developing the various API's

 

A/A radar needs work, in terms of not behaving like a magical AESA radar, and having "high quality" instant trackfiles the moment the radar scans over the target the first time. There need to be benefits and drawbacks of various modes like STT vs TWS modeled. RCS needs to modeled based on aspect and weapons carried (hey, turns out there is another sim thats done all this for YEARS)... And there needs to be some reasonable "rank" ordering of various radar systems in game, not just going by some inflated brochure numbers.

 

I can't comment on the "shiny new" FLIR API, but I hope to god it models MWIR vs LWIR differences, Diurnal cycles, atmospheric absorption (i.e. water/humidty/clouds/raid), IR reflections/emissivity and not just assuming everything is blackbody. And then actually models things like sensor resolution. TBH most of this applies to all the visual sensors in various ways.

 

And yeah, the holy grail of contrast lock and the 3 compute cycles that would take... 

And at that day we would really have a proper "combat simulation" going on from a sensor wise. 

 

Just touched those things in another thread about ATFLIR vs LITENING use in hornet that why to go back to 2nd gen Litening. 

 

All that would make Shkval nicely weaker, show it limitations and problems. But as overall performance nerfing happens everywhere, I take it. 

So what is players needs to find new ways to play, as that is how something being difficult in reality, you need to find new ways to deal the problems or improved the weapons to maintain the advantage.

 

Maybe many will not like if suddenly BS3 becomes even less effective and capable (especially compared to a Apache etc), but it will make it far more interesting to fly then.

 

Maybe we all find out that why KA-50 was not wanted to be taken in service if you can't find anything with it.....

  • Like 2

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Fri13 said:

And at that day we would really have a proper "combat simulation" going on from a sensor wise. 

 

Just touched those things in another thread about ATFLIR vs LITENING use in hornet that why to go back to 2nd gen Litening. 

 

All that would make Shkval nicely weaker, show it limitations and problems. But as overall performance nerfing happens everywhere, I take it. 

So what is players needs to find new ways to play, as that is how something being difficult in reality, you need to find new ways to deal the problems or improved the weapons to maintain the advantage.

 

Maybe many will not like if suddenly BS3 becomes even less effective and capable (especially compared to a Apache etc), but it will make it far more interesting to fly then.

 

Maybe we all find out that why KA-50 was not wanted to be taken in service if you can't find anything with it.....

 

Yeah, the thing being that there are already "games" that actually do decently simulate this to some extent (no I can't talk about it here, illegal) to include EW simualtion. It just sucks that ED won't listen... 

 

Because unfortunately modern combat isn't about how many G's some dude can pull. Its about how good his SA is from his sensors, from the ground integration, and what his kill chain is, and thats all 100% sensor based. If you get to use your mk1 eyeball, well a whole host of things have gone wrong (and yeah I get that this happens regularly, especially for ground attack, and with the modern EW environment for A/A combat sometimes too (see indo/pak recently). 

 

So if ED wants to make grandiose claims about "modern combat" they need to seriously rethink their priorities when it comes to sensor modeling. IMO they shoulda spent more time with the 60's and 70's stuff which relied less on that...

 

 

 


Edited by Harlikwin
  • Like 2

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, everyone knows which sim you are talking about, and they did it 20 years ago.  ED is too intent on punching out new modules with very simplified systems.

 

All these systems need to be brought up to realism.  And if they did all this, maybe I could convince a lot more of the people I know to ditch that 20 year old game ( and it's 90's graphics ), and come over to DCS.

 

The graphics are decent, the flight simulation on the Ka-50 and A-10 are pretty good ( the only two I REALLY fly ),  it's the AI and the systems that need work.


Edited by 3WA
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...