Jump to content

DCS Features Wish List


Dr. Mitsos

DCS Features Wish List  

88 members have voted

  1. 1. DCS Features Wish List



Recommended Posts

Yes, EtherealN is right. Weapons damage potential is rendered right, it should be something close to realism.

 

What would be nice is some more, lets say dust. If you watch bomb impacts, there is a lot of dust and debris, that really would add to the atmosphere.

 

BTW, I am sure that the damage can be modified. It is possible in BS. I once modified that darn unguided rockets to something near a tactical nuclear bomb because I was too stoopid to hit something with them - and promptly blasted me and my wingie away :music_whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess what you mean EtherealN, is that adding more particle effects would make the sim too heavy on the GPU? But having the same smoke particles disperse more over time should be possible without much graphics performance impact I'd think.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

  • CPU i7 4970k @ 4.7 GHz
  • RAM 16GB G.Skill TridentX 1600
  • ATX ASUS Z97-PRO
  • DSU Samsung 850 PRO 256GB SSD for Win10, Plextor M6e 128GB SSD for DCS exclusively, RAID-1 HDDs
  • GFX Aorus GTX 1080 Ti 11GB Xtreme Edition, ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q, 27" with G-Sync, Oculus Rift CV1

  • HID TM HOTAS Warthog + 10 cm extension, MFG Crosswind pedals, TrackIR 5, Obutto oZone

 

My TM Warthog Profile + Chart, F-15C EM Diagram Generator

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and no. First of all that would alter the appearance of the smoke, and keeping them for longer would make larger and most especially longer battles a much more taxing experience for the computer. Remember that we are already struggling to keep this playable at lower/medium end machines, and don't fool yourself into thinking that this would only impact GPU's where there may be a good bit of headroom due to the CPU bottleneck - the GPU takes it's orders from the CPU.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imho the DCS engine is pretty easy on the GPU particle wise. If you look around other games, then you can see that nowadays GPUs can handle much much more parcticles. The problem might be more complicated then 'let's throw in more parcticles', engine limitations might come into play (we're basicaly seeing the same effects since Lomac), and an overhaul might be required.

I think that better effects are in the list of what ED would like to improve, the same way they overhauled the sound engine. But more important things are planned first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, winz, what I'm saying there is that even if the engine is light on GPU as far as particles go, the GPU still takes orders from the CPU. And the CPU is not something that DCS is light on.

 

This will improve once further engines in the program get new versions and can be migrated to run in their own threads (as was done with the sound engine), but right now the graphics engine sits in the same thread as the simulation and physics engines, and competes with them for core cycles. And even though the GPU does the actual processing of the particle, it needs to be told a lot about the particle by the CPU before it can do anything with it.

 

This isn't as big of a problem for most games that are released, since they are not doing a military grade simulation at the same time, on the same CPU core.

 

That said, I don't know exactly how much work the CPU gets from the particles compared to other graphical effects (for example AA is almost entirely CPU-less computing, the GPU can do it pretty much on it's own since it's a relatively simple operation done on the completed image).


Edited by EtherealN

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, EtherealN is right. Weapons damage potential is rendered right, it should be something close to realism.

 

What would be nice is some more, lets say dust. If you watch bomb impacts, there is a lot of dust and debris, that really would add to the atmosphere.

BTW, I am sure that the damage can be modified. It is possible in BS. I once modified that darn unguided rockets to something near a tactical nuclear bomb because I was too stoopid to hit something with them - and promptly blasted me and my wingie away :music_whistling:

 

:thumbup:

 

i've watched tons of a10 & ah64 flir videos, also a single 30mm round moves a lot of dust.

in this way dcs series is really far from reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see some more variation in damage effects/smoke rather than all the same colour rising at the same rate etc. Perhaps a 20% chance of explosions - similar to hitting an ammo bunker, rounds cooking off etc. Difference strengths of explosions, turrets flipping (see Steel Beasts) ...

 

A 2000lb'er in RL looks terrifying from 1000m with a massine plun etc.

 

Of course, if DCS took advantage of the other 5 CPUs in my system, thsi would be a problem ;) ... I know, not a simple thing by a loooooong way!

 

One day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, if DCS took advantage of the other 5 CPUs in my system, thsi would be a problem ;) ... I know, not a simple thing by a loooooong way!

 

One day.

 

One day indeed. :)

Trust me, ED is very passionate about this and I think the people that are the most frustrated about the realities of software development as a small independent is the people that could make it happen but are forced to do boring things like finish products so that their employer doesn't go bankrupt. :P

 

But it's all in the wishlists and it'll be made to happen as soon as the combinations of economic, market and technical realities allow.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you are requesting would basically make it unplayable for... well, pretty much anyone. :P

 

Just making them "bigger" is possible of course, though, and I suspect that that could even be achieved through modding (I think it's in one of the LUAs, but don't take my word for it).

 

EtherealN, if a fella wanted to mod a bigger dust cloud into weapons secondaries, could he make darker colored "clouds" appear at the impact point and move (and dissipate) at a higher rate than clouds in the sky? Clouds are something that are present in abundance already. I wonder if something like this could be tempered with the cloud settings as to not interfere with a persons late 90s 486DX266.

 

I know there are some people getting together in this thread to make some sweeping suggestions to ED.

It's a good thing that this is Early Access and we've all volunteered to help test and enhance this work in progress... despite the frustrations inherent in the task with even the simplest of software... otherwise people might not understand that this incredibly complex unfinished module is unfinished. /light-hearted sarcasm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

StrongHarm, I'm not really the right man to answer that question, but I suspect creating secondaries would require hard-coding for those entities where they are not already included (like the ammo bunker).

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to comment
Share on other sites

StrongHarm, I'm not really the right man to answer that question, but I suspect creating secondaries would require hard-coding for those entities where they are not already included (like the ammo bunker).

 

 

Oh .. right. Well... I'm not much of a developer, it's just a hobby for me... I know you guys created a sim that 2 out of 3 men prefer over sex... but...

...I'M SURE I CAN TEACH YOU GUYS A THING OR TWO!

<runs away cackling and looking back nervously>

 

It's a good thing that this is Early Access and we've all volunteered to help test and enhance this work in progress... despite the frustrations inherent in the task with even the simplest of software... otherwise people might not understand that this incredibly complex unfinished module is unfinished. /light-hearted sarcasm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't there an Arma 2 mod that add particles to explosions?

Anyone now how much more heavy it is?

 

Something else, what about engine limitations?

 

Yeah, it's called WarFX Particle. The dev for it totally reworked it from the ground up for Arma:OA and even though it is quite extensive on the visuals it has surprisingly little extra load on the CPU/GPU. I never get the quick stutters if I quickly look away and then back towards the effect. Even when it is going hammer and tongs with dust billowing up from a Chinook and mortars landing around us.

I don't test for bugs, but when I do I do it in production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually put amo dumps in my missions, just because they are interesting when they blow up.

 

But yes I agree with this, explosions need to be better. I like the explosions in Company of Heroes, dirt and debris is thrown up and it all looks lovely.

Regards

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly! That's what I've been saying.. shrapnels and spirits.. shrapnels and spirits...

Gawd! Get to work! <does his best Napoleon Dynamite>

 

The bottom line is that they need to update the explosion spirits with the latest tech :P

They also need to model shrapnels and other stuff, since AA missiles are kinda ineffective :(

It's a good thing that this is Early Access and we've all volunteered to help test and enhance this work in progress... despite the frustrations inherent in the task with even the simplest of software... otherwise people might not understand that this incredibly complex unfinished module is unfinished. /light-hearted sarcasm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCS A-10C New static objects for training

 

Dear ED,

 

I need to say that training mission in A-10C are superb but I am one of those who are particular about details and I can't help myself but I am missing cocnrete training targets. Would it be hard to create a new static object for this type of targets? Also, it would be great to have a launch pad for tow targets for A2A training. I think that many people would appreciate this as it surely can add a bit of the reality to the sim.

 

keep up the good work,

Molnija

Motherboard: ASUS Rog STRIX Z390E GAMING Processor: Intel i9-9900K (without OC) RAM: DDR4 Kingstone 32GB, 3133MHz, CL15 Graphics Card: ASUS Rog Strix RTX2080S OC Joy: Saitek X56 PRO + Pedals TrackIR: 5PRO + TrackClipPro OS: Windows 10 PRO x64 bit My DCS dreams: MiG-23MLA, MiG-29S, MiG-31, Su-17M4, Su-24, Su-25, Su-27, Mirage F1, Tornado IDS, Mil Mi-2, Mil Mi-24P and new maps: Central Europe (1970 - 1990), Vietnam (1960 - 1980), Afghanistan, Cuba, Kaliningrad and more new 3d AI models :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Those were GAU8 rounds exploides only???

 

Aye - that's the HEI rounds.

 

 

pgu_13b.jpg

 

 

 

Danger close!


Edited by 159th_Viper
Pic added

Novice or Veteran looking for an alternative MP career?

Click me to commence your Journey of Pillage and Plunder!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

'....And when I get to Heaven, to St Peter I will tell....

One more Soldier reporting Sir, I've served my time in Hell......'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Track file REWIND

 

There ever going to be functionality to be able to fast forward and rewind track files?

 

I enjoy watching some of the battles and last night I ended up just narrowly missed getting hit by a sam.. I mean so close it was pathetic. I want to be able to rewind and get a good screen shot or watch from different angles.

 

Even though the next SAM hit me tore off half my wing (I did manage to land it)...

 

I know you can use CTRL Z to accelerate time in a replay but as far as I know you can't rewind!

---

May your takeoffs equal your landings!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1

 

And the ability tell the simulator to skip to time MM:SS in the replay, without wasting time on drawing the 3D world.

 

And finally the ability to cut tracks and only save the interesting bits for later enjoyment.

 

It's not trivial though. Takes a fair bit more work to get it to work that way. I have a feeling that what we are seeing is the easy way to have some track replay functionality rather than none, while other things are attended to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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