DCS Features Wish List

[Poor mans sniper]

Trust me - you do not want to be doing that :D

Why not? Do it to fly lighter. :megalol:

[power5]

yeah, a lot lighter without wings and tail and engines for sure. :megalol:

[Poor mans sniper]

Not even close, I agree, but I'm not talking about gameplay, I'm talking about server scalability and performance. When hosting a game in DCS its very demanding to ask the cpu handle client requests and flight characteristics.

Well, the difference is also the game engine. The source engine is a highly-developed FPS engine with many multiplayer capabilities.

Edit: A moral system would be awesome. When units see many of their units being destroyed, or their best vehicle on the battlefield, they retreat or run for cover. Also, the more warehouses and supply depots you destroy the less units or items from that place on the battlefield.

Edited September 25, 2010 by Poor mans sniper

[BlueRidgeDx]

One thing I'd like to see is the ability to setup training BFM scenarios with other friendly units and/or wingmen. Specifically, I mean 3/6/9k perch setups with specific Learning Objectives appropriate to the airframe in question (the A-10 in this case).

 

For Offensive BFM training, the defender is often a "limited" bandit that flies a specific profile to aid in training. For instance, in a Guns-Track or Heat-to-Guns excercise, the defender must reverse his turn in order to present the proper sight picture to the attacker.

 

Flying against a predictable bandit from a consistent starting position and energy state helps isolate errors quickly. Flying against the enemy AI drastically diminishes training value due to the unpredictability of the bandit at the merge.

[Yellonet]

Why are you releasing bombs under neg g anyway? :)

It was just an example that there's no realistic physics or collisions in the game.

For instance, dropping a while turning sharply to either left or right should impart such a motion to the bomb, I'm not sure that it does, the bomb seems to go pretty straight anyway.

[Druid_]

If you are in the turn, the bomb will release in the direction you are heading at the time of release. A dumb bomb will not continue to turn, only sideslip, for a short time, according to the amount of G (who drops bombs in a high G turn?).

 

If you are turning hard how do you know its going pretty straight? What exactly do you want the bomb to do with regard to the flight modelling?

[sobek]

It was just an example that there's no realistic physics or collisions in the game.

 

There is proper physics calculation. Point taken about collisions (although i don't know if this was taken care of for DCSW).

 

For instance, dropping a while turning sharply to either left or right should impart such a motion to the bomb, I'm not sure that it does, the bomb seems to go pretty straight anyway.

 

This, on the other hand, lets me suspect that you should sharpen your knowledge of classic mechanics. A mass that is free of force will continue to move in a straight line. You cannot toss a 'curve bomb' :D (note that the curve ball effect is due to aerodynamic forces caused by rotation, not throwing it in a curve).

Edited September 25, 2010 by sobek

[Yellonet]

This, on the other hand, lets me suspect that you should sharpen your knowledge of classic mechanics. A mass that is free of force will continue to move in a straight line. You cannot toss a 'curve bomb' :D (note that the curve ball effect is due to aerodynamic forces caused by rotation, not throwing it in a curve).

You're right. I was thinking of the sidewards motion that can theoretically be imparted upon a bullet by means of the barrel moving sideways after the bullet is fired. It clearly does not apply for bombs :doh:

But perhaps it should work for rockets and canon rounds.. hmmm :)

If you make a fast turn and fire a bullet in the middle of the turn, that sideways force should be transferred to the bullet, for close range the effect would be negligible but if you shoot at long distances, the sideways motion should move the bullet to the side a bit.

[sobek]

But perhaps it should work for rockets and canon rounds.. hmmm :)

If you make a fast turn and fire a bullet in the middle of the turn, that sideways force should be transferred to the bullet, for close range the effect would be negligible but if you shoot at long distances, the sideways motion should move the bullet to the side a bit.

 

I haven't played BS in quite a while now, but IIRC if you hover and slip a little to the side, the point of impact starts to drift towards the side you are slipping, accordingly. So basically, what you ask for is already in the sim. :)

[Yellonet]

I haven't played BS in quite a while now, but IIRC if you hover and slip a little to the side, the point of impact starts to drift towards the side you are slipping, accordingly. So basically, what you ask for is already in the sim. :)

Well.... then.... hrrmm... eh.. :music_whistling:

[71st_Mastiff]

Wow, do I detect people actually think they can curve bullets?

what movie you been watching? (that one with Angeli Jolie?):book:

 

Einstein's theory of size + mass=...

 

So bullets are not big enough. Bombs yes but bullets no.

[Druid_]

You're right. I was thinking of the sidewards motion that can theoretically be imparted upon a bullet by means of the barrel moving sideways after the bullet is fired. It clearly does not apply for bombs :doh:

http://members.cox.net/meddinmonkey/physics.htm Have a go with these:cry:

 

The sideways motion velocity of the barrel (or aircraft) you are talking about is very small especially when compared to the initial velocity and will have little effect on displacement. The opposing force on bombs & rockets is Air Friction and gravity, speaking of which, wind has the biggest effect on lateral displacement from initial trajectory. The launch direction (i.e.the direction in which the barrel/aircraft is pointing) has the biggest impact on accuracy.

 

Hmmn that leads me onto a question for Sobek, has the wind and air density at various altitudes (set in Mission Editor) been modelled on high altitude release munition trajectory?

[sobek]

Hmmn that leads me onto a question for Sobek, has the wind and air density at various altitudes (set in Mission Editor) been modelled on high altitude release munition trajectory?

 

Atmospheric modelling is not quite there yet, AFAIK, but i don't know for sure. That would be a question for Yo-Yo.

Edited September 26, 2010 by sobek

[Druid_]

Atmospheric modelling is not quite there yet, AFAIK, but i don't know for sure.

 

All this physics modelling will eat frames until ED start supporting multicore CPUs properly I guess.

[BLuDKLoT]

Please just provide an option to remove that "glued wingman" feature. It's so horribly unrealistic, I can't stand it and it ruins the entire feel for me.

 

If this has been commented on, please add me to the haters list.

 

:huh:

 

Blud

[Yo-Yo]

http://members.cox.net/meddinmonkey/physics.htm Have a go with these:cry:

 

The sideways motion velocity of the barrel (or aircraft) you are talking about is very small especially when compared to the initial velocity and will have little effect on displacement. The opposing force on bombs & rockets is Air Friction and gravity, speaking of which, wind has the biggest effect on lateral displacement from initial trajectory. The launch direction (i.e.the direction in which the barrel/aircraft is pointing) has the biggest impact on accuracy.

 

Hmmn that leads me onto a question for Sobek, has the wind and air density at various altitudes (set in Mission Editor) been modelled on high altitude release munition trajectory?

 

You are not right. Side velocity vector is added to the muzzle velocity. For example, if you have 10 m/s of side movement and 1000 m/s of muzzle velocity then if your shell flies 1 s to the target, your impact point will be almost in 10 m of the sight point. I say ALMOST because the bullet encounters side wind 10 m/s that reduces the impact point shift.

The atmosphere is taken in account for all bombs, shells and rockets. By the way there is a significant difference between shells and rockets ballistics in side wind condition. The rockets have engines and the thrust move trajectory against the wind so the impact point moves against the wing and then it starts to move with the wind. The bullet goes with the wind from the start.

 

You can notice these effects in BS. I remember that there was a discussion about it earlier.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Yo-Yo

[Druid_]

You are not right. Side velocity vector is added to the muzzle velocity. For example, if you have 10 m/s of side movement and 1000 m/s of muzzle velocity then if your shell flies 1 s to the target, your impact point will be almost in 10 m of the sight point. I say ALMOST because the bullet encounters side wind 10 m/s that reduces the impact point shift.

I said that the sideways motion is very small in relation to the initial munition velocity which for a gun it would be and hence displacement would be small, would it not? 10 m/sec is a sideways motion of 22 mph, I'd like to see anyone move a gun that fast sideways without throwing it. I was answering in the practical sense and not the theoretical.

 

Its a simple triangulation of vectors problem with gravity and Air friction thrown in to complicate matters. Also are you able to sideslip an aircraft at 10m/sec whilst in a LEVEL turn. I say level because you could put it on a knife edge with top rudder and let the aircraft fall but then the vector would be in the vertical and again there would be no lateral sideways (or horizontal plane) motion on the munition.

 

The atmosphere is taken in account for all bombs, shells and rockets. By the way there is a significant difference between shells and rockets ballistics in side wind condition. The rockets have engines and the thrust move trajectory against the wind so the impact point moves against the wing and then it starts to move with the wind. The bullet goes with the wind from the start.

 

You can notice these effects in BS. I remember that there was a discussion about it earlier

 

Sorry didnt see previous discussion Yo Yo and if it was BS related then wouldnt really have applied to my Question. i.e. HIGH alt munition release. Havent released any munitions from BS at High Alt (and neither would I want to).

 

So if I understand correctly, if I release an unguided munition from 20,000ft in a10c with the ME wind at this altitude set as a 200kt headwind whereas at 10,000 ft it becomes a 50kt tailwind down to ground level the munition would act according to the changing wind vector (& air density) during its descent?

[Dimebag1]

I would like to see a full and highly detailed model of the pilot, viewed from first person, so that when you look down you can see youself strapped in, arms and legs visible.

 

Additionally I would like this feature extended to include support for tracking of the body, primarily the arms, and hands, which would interface with tracking systems such as the new kinect from xbox, or even an adapted trackir ( which could only feasibly track the hands). The usage of this limb tracking system would ideally allow a user to virtually interact with a clickable cockpit, which would dramatically increase the level of realism.

 

Just an idea, but I think it would lead to amazing immersion and allow us to be freed from our keyboards.

[nomdeplume]

I would like to see a full and highly detailed model of the pilot, viewed from first person, so that when you look down you can see youself strapped in, arms and legs visible.

 

This is in Black Shark, don't know if it's in Warthog. I think something like Shift+P toggles the in-game pilot on/off? The problem is he tends to obscure buttons and switches you need to click on...

 

Additionally I would like this feature extended to include support for tracking of the body, primarily the arms, and hands, which would interface with tracking systems such as the new kinect from xbox, or even an adapted trackir ( which could only feasibly track the hands). The usage of this limb tracking system would ideally allow a user to virtually interact with a clickable cockpit, which would dramatically increase the level of realism.

 

Hmm I dunno; sounds like quasi-realism to me. It would be neat for sure, but I think in practice reaching for an interacting with invisible controls would be a real chore and very inefficient. The effort required to animate the in-game pilot in a way that didn't look weird and to tune the motion detection would be massive, and I think that even at its best, it'd still be worse than clicking on buttons with a mouse, or using something like the CH MFP.

[636_Castle]

It may be a little late to add something like this into DCS:W, but last night I started thinking about something that would in my opinion improve the DCS experience.

 

DCS would be great with sort of a gambling feature that you could enable/disable for the single player campaign.

 

For example, you start out with a low amount of DCS points. If you were to go through the training missions, each training mission is worth extra DCS points based on your performance etc. As you enter the real world missions, you gamble a certain amount of your DCS points. Winning means obviously a much higher reward, but dying would result in losing those points. DCS points would go towards things like logbook promotions, rewards, ribbons, maybe even unlockable media?

 

I think it would add in a bit of suspense when it comes to fighting the enemy. Rather than having an entire map filled with "flaming cliffs" (pun :smilewink:), where it's only a matter of hitting escape-->recover, you really have an immersive reason to try and make it home safely.

[Dimebag1]

This is in Black Shark, don't know if it's in Warthog. I think something like Shift+P toggles the in-game pilot on/off? The problem is he tends to obscure buttons and switches you need to click on...

 

 

 

Hmm I dunno; sounds like quasi-realism to me. It would be neat for sure, but I think in practice reaching for an interacting with invisible controls would be a real chore and very inefficient. The effort required to animate the in-game pilot in a way that didn't look weird and to tune the motion detection would be massive, and I think that even at its best, it'd still be worse than clicking on buttons with a mouse, or using something like the CH MFP.

 

Ultimately it would be intended to be used in conjunction with a stereoscopic HMD (head mounted display) capable of 3d, which when coupled with head tracking and limb tracking, would combine to create an experience not dissimilar to that of a real pilot. The ability to move the head and limbs to enable one to see controls, switches or indicators which may be obscured, and the ability to perceive depth would offset most of the finnickyness of trying to find and activate a virtual control in 3d space. If you have a full scale cockpit to match the aircraft your flying this would obviously not be a problem. If you have difficulty activating controls with this setup I'm afraid there is probably not much hope for you flying a real plane, as the experience would be very similar. I know there is no way this feature will see the light of day until the gaming industry has fully embraced 3d as well as HMD's (the concept compared to a 3d display is far superior when used in 1st person games, now the hardware just needs to catch up). If we are concerned with improving realism and immersion, which as a flight sim enthusiast, most people will be, then you can't ignore the potential of such a feature, no matter fow finnicky. As far as the difficulty of animating the limbs, I don't think this would be a problem, as xbox has managed to mirror almost the exact movements of a virtual character with their kinect, and calibration would be an issue which would be resolved in the same way that coders of xbox have achieved their successful interface. Who knows, a feature like this could even spark the interest of the general gaming community who mostly play fps's, and bring the attention to flight simming that it has long deserved. This is as much a gimmick as trackir is a gimmick, a useful and functional addition that improves realism.

[Dominik]

I'm sure this was mentioned somewhere in the previous 160 some pages of this thread, so I'd just like to humbly add my vote for proper multi-threading.

 

My setup isn't completely standard, it being dual CPU (8 cores total). The problem is that each core only runs at 2.33ghz and BS pegs one core and uses the other at about 50%. In short, the frame rates are such that I can't play the sim, even though my graphics card is a 5870.

 

It would be real nice if the program took full advantage of the computing horsepower of any machine, as it seems multi-core is the way CPUs are heading.

[TheMoose]

I just thought of something that would be nice as a wish. Rainbows in certain angles when you are in certain positions with the sun piercing through the clouds with rain. True does not serve any purpose then eye candy. But nevertheless it was never done before. Personally I would think it would be cool. Just a thought ;) they included "God rays" which looks very awesome when you see it. Rainbows would be a nice bonus. :D

Edited October 8, 2010 by TheMoose

[Poor mans sniper]

I just thought of something that would be nice as a wish. Rainbows in certain angles when you are in certain positions with the sun piercing through the clouds with rain. True does not serve any purpose then eye candy. But nevertheless it was never done before. Personally I would think it would be cool. Just a thought ;) they included "God rays" which looks very awesome when you see it. Rainbows would be a nice bonus. :D

May god smile upon your A-10! :lol:

[diveplane]

i was hoping ed by now would have rain on the canopy glass.

 

slider setting in options will be nice addition ..on off , or added line in options lua

 

....

 

another feature its a must is the smoke drifting on ground and long plumes , this is a must imo the smoke needs to be updated to a more realistic look .

 

again this feature can be set in options lua advanced high smoke med or low , depending on your pc power.

 

 

i am enjoying the beta thus far, amazing work and progress.

 

these can be added later though as extra features.

 

not main priority atm.