DCS Features Wish List

[CAT_101st]

You need to post that question over at the problems thread forum.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=91

[BKLronin]

A Dynamic Multiplayer Campaign would be an addition for having fun during centuries.

[Duke49th]

A Dynamic Multiplayer Campaign would be an addition for having fun during centuries.

 

I agree:)

 

 

And here is a question:

 

What does ED planning for the future?

 

I(we, the 49th Black Diamonds) are building missions every day, for several month now.

 

It starts to get very annoying! You have to build a mission for at least a few hours. And even it is free of bugs, it take too much time.

 

So, to hold multiplayer - non-PvP - squads for the next years, it is absolutely nessecary to have at least a semi dynamic campaign!

 

That's why I am asking, what does ED planing for the future?

 

I hope I get an answer from any official! (speculations from any player/consumer is not what I want, sorry)

 

Cheers

Edited May 13, 2009 by Duke49th

[Zerorone]

Yes, please. Give us a dy. Campi. please.

[nightflyer23]

I agree !!!!

To keep that product alive for the next 10-20 years (like Falcon)

its necesary to have a dynamic campaign.

AND an ai for the ground units like droping Smoke when they under atack change the formation, retreat and advance again if the situation is saver and so on and on.And more important to the near future is the pathfinding of the units tanks shouldnt stop on every little hill and stop the whole atack.:smartass:

[CAT_101st]

Theas are all items that were brought up last year when the 1st copy was releast. DCS is a work in progress. the patch in the process is over 300mb. many changes are comming. Some are limited to the ablitys of the game engin. In witch a new game engin is due to come with the A-10 releas 9 months from who knows.

[coder1024]

A dynamic campaign is one big piece that I love in Falcon that I think I'll miss in DCS Black Shark. I've only just started playing, but that's a big hole. I know they say their campaign is better in some ways, but I think thats partly spin to explain away why they didn't do the dynamic campaign. I think at the end of the day nothing beats a campaign which runs dynamically on its own and where you can just jump into the battle and see what happens :)

 

Having said that, a dynamic campaign is something which might not have as much real-world-training appeal. Their military customers are looking to train specific scenarios and perhaps aren't interested in the "fun" aspect of a dynamic campaign. They want to control the environment and know whats happening in the training so they have repeatability. Sure, you could say real life isn't like that, but real life isn't exactly like a dynamic campaign either. The dynamic campaign is more for the "fun" factor. So maybe this is why they haven't done it with DCS Black Shark, there's not enough overlap to justify the cost.

[coder1024]

Also, please allow multi-selection in the controller options so I can pick 3 assignments and clear them all at once rather than having to click each one.

 

And let me use the mouse wheel to scroll through the list.

[Guest piloui]

Track recorder player

 

Hi everybody.

I don't know if the point has already been dicussed, but what about a real track player/recorder.

With all play options : play pause rewind and so.

And record options : record button, séquence recording.

Something like a time bar with time slider to make playback and recording easier.

It's not the main purpose of fly sims, i know, but it would be a great tool, wouldn't it ?

 

Good fly to all.

 

See you.

[GGTharos]

Use tacview. The trackfile is non-rewindable because of its structure - it saves space to do it this way.

[Allo]

Hi everybody.

I don't know if the point has already been dicussed, but what about a real track player/recorder.

With all play options : play pause rewind and so.

And record options : record button, séquence recording.

Something like a time bar with time slider to make playback and recording easier.

It's not the main purpose of fly sims, i know, but it would be a great tool, wouldn't it ?

 

Good fly to all.

 

See you.

I was thinking about this the other day.

How about a program that plays the track as normal, but records the aircraft's position. Then once it's played fully, it could be manipulated because it doesn't record the track via joystick inputs but by aircraft position.

I take it that that is why we can't rewind, because a track file is played via the joystick inputs?:dunno:

I don't know but I think that if the DCS series is in it for the long haul, this really needs to be looked into IMO.

[th3flyboy]

One thing I would like to see eventually, the whole world modeled in DCS. This would allow for someone to fly from nellis, attack targets over the middle east, and rtb, all in one mission, without interruption.

 

Def a dynamic campaign would be needed. And also a bit more as far as combat on the ground goes would be appreciated. I would like to see infantry throwing various grenades, using explosive charges, mines, snipers, even Specops. I would also love to see amphibious ops, for instance LAVs storming beaches, or LCACs landing troops on the beach. Finally, I would want to see the ability to use a pistol as a downed pilot (what kind of combat pilot doesn't carry a pistol...)

[JG-1_Vogel]

Wish list:

 

European theater, conventional war against the USSR/Russia would be AWESOME... just imagine the possibilities for mission builders! (Red Storm Rising anyone? :P)

 

The Harrier! Please! Could release a two module set of the FA2 Sea Harrier complete with naval ops from "Mother", and a more modern GR7 (or older...). The Harrier is such an influential aircraft in modern military history, the Falklands War for example would have been rather different if it weren't for the Harriers of 800 & 801NAS from HMS Illustrious and HMS Hermes. A lot of us are begging for the chance to fly carrier ops... so something like that would satisfy both the Naval Aviators and the ground pounders living on dry land. Its also a fact that British aircraft are VERY under represented in flight simulations... for some reason people favour the American or Russian rust buckets! :doh:

 

I would like to see older aircraft too, F-4 Phantom's and S2b Buc's from Ark Royal. But that probably isn't going to happen any time soon.

 

Another interesting possibility would be the inclusion of multi-player platforms. With the inclusion of two seater playables, it raises the question of in the future will we see more complex platforms? For instance you could have a Sea King/Nimrod on ASW missions or an E3/E2C. The latter would make Red Flag missions VERY interesting! Human AWACS for me made the larger FoF missions in F4 quite immersive, that element is in my opinion absolutely SH!T in LOMAC/DCS. The human element in ATC/AWACS would make things so much more believable.

 

Current Wish List:

 

1. Harrier GR?/FA2/FRS1

2. S2.b Blackburn Buccaneer

3. Tornado F3/GR1

4. F-14!

5. F-16C Block 40/MLU/50

Just my 2p :pilotfly:

Edited May 24, 2009 by 159th_LoneWolf

[Horizon]

Having said that, a dynamic campaign is something which might not have as much real-world-training appeal. Their military customers are looking to train specific scenarios and perhaps aren't interested in the "fun" aspect of a dynamic campaign. They want to control the environment and know whats happening in the training so they have repeatability.

 

Do it like in Falcon 4.0. A dynamic campain for the Big Fun and tactical engagements for training specific scenarios. Would be awesome in Black Shark.

[joey45]

2. S2.b Blackburn Buccaneer

if you can get me propa blueprints then i'll do it... but not the FM though

 

 

F4 - FGR - the RN version

 

the BB-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackburn_Buccaneer

http://74th.co.uk/aircraft/buccaneer/buccaneer1.html

http://www.ejection-history.org.uk/Aircraft_by_Type/Buccaneer.htm

http://www.military-aircraft.org.uk/bombers/hawker-siddeley-buccaneer.htm

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4bc_1239560066

http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/0_Gulf-missions.html

http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/0_Contents.html

Edited May 24, 2009 by joey45

[leafer]

I don't think we'll be getting dynamic campaign any time soon; my guess would be three years after the Apache. Ask Swingkid and he'll tell you you'll have better luck sneaking up on a pride of lioness. :D

 

What I would really like is little thing like little men shooting at me with their AKs, RPGs, etc. I made such mission and they just stood there even when I was within range and practically almost on top of them.

 

I'm sure solid trees has been beaten to death?

 

I think I'll just be in absolute bliss after they released the new engine and real weather and other atmosperic effects.

[nemises]

...really?...they totally shoot at me

[joey45]

...really?...they totally shoot at me

like totally.

[Panzertard]

* Better terrain details in the Mission Editor.

 

Not sure if it's mentioned here on the 70 pages so far :)

[born2thrill]

* Better terrain details in the Mission Editor.

 

Not sure if it's mentioned here on the 70 pages so far :)

 

Yup i agree. I donno if you can put static camaras in with the mission editor (not had time to check) but this would be realy great:)

[Panzertard]

Oh while we're at it - two simple features

1.) Ability to start Mission Editor from Multiplayer GUI

2.) And/or the ability to switch between MP/Single Player GUI in "Main"

Because when you edit missions you may want to switch - and while editing MP missions you want to be able to jump right back into the editor maybe?

[slug88]

What I would really like is little thing like little men shooting at me with their AKs, RPGs, etc. I made such mission and they just stood there even when I was within range and practically almost on top of them.

 

yeah, infantry already do this. Either they were on your side, or you were out of range.

[MrHelicopter]

i would like to see a AH-1Z Super cobra in DCS that would be awesome.

[ericinexile]

A "Discard Mission" Option

 

If you guys are serious about the DCS Campaign engine then please consider allowing a player to back out of a campaign mission without penalty. A dozen times now I've unpaused in the cockpit only to realize my TrackIr wasn't working. Exiting out to fix it stepped me back a stage. What a hassle! Yes I know...I can edit my logbook but that's not really a solution.

 

Thanks,

Smokin' Hole

[Strekaya]

I would like to extend my congratulations for the developers for presenting a simulation of the likes I thought I would never see again. Being a 'sim head' since 1987, I had feared that the 'halcyon days' of study simulations were all but extinct for my preferred genre. Still past, but not entirely gone. Also, the release of a simulation which 'left the gate' as bug-free as this one is truly remarkable. Having beared witness to Falcon 4, the premature release of every product Bohemia Interactive (Operation Flashpoint, ArmA, and now ArmA 2) has ever made, and frankly every PC game being funded by a publisher and is pushed out the door early, it was worth the wait to see a polished product.

 

After playing this wonderful simulation for a few months, here are my hopefully modest proposals for the sake of mission scripting and perhaps a wishlist item or two for 'ambiance'. It is a privilege as well to have the ability to voice such desires with the ability for the developers to see such requests.

 

- In mission scripting, the ability to set flags via the communications menu, perhaps a special section otherwise hidden if unused, reserved for a scripted command, such as to 'begin an attack' for example.

 

- A means via the communication menu to allow wingmen to engage targets without using guided missiles, or for the same reasoning, at least a means for wingmen to solely engage high threat targets, such as tanks or anything which shoots back. The AI will seem to prioritize AAA/SAM threats at range among targets it sees in it's AI targeting radius, but will often engage 'low' priority targets such as trucks or targets which do not necessitate the use of guided missiles. On their depletion, the wingmen tend to engage 'close in' with guns and rockets, at risk of tanks or IFVs which can then shoot back. I realize it can potentially be a complex situation to manage, but my hope is to have an additional command which fills the gap between attacking air defense units and ground units in general where guided missiles are not wasted by wingmen on non-threatening targets.

 

- The ability for ground units to enter a mode of self defense, such as smoke cartridges or extending out of it's formation or otherwise taking an evasive action to break up a formation. It is a hope, which perhaps is already in consideration, to create a more 'organic' means of ground units to attempt to defend themselves.

 

- The ability to export flags at the end of a mission or encapsulate them within a campaign as some sort of array so that they can be used in subsequent missions. I think it would be excellent to establish a means of persistence between missions as well as potentially creating a greater variety of scripting in individual missions in addition to mere randomization. It would also be nice to be able to set flags by a 'fraction' of a group which is destroyed and be able to convey that 'forward' via a flag. That way, conditions can be set to create a pseudo-dynamic 'bridge' between missions where units can be available or unavailable based on flags established from previous ones.

 

- The ability to 'attach' artillery targets to moving groups, or even the impact point of a player or AI's illumination rockets, illumination bombs, or other light source event (which look to be implemented in the upcoming patch) within the artillery's targetting radius as a 'fire here' trigger. As a byproduct of it, an additional means to 'correct fire', either by scripted attachment to a friendly unit's ability to see the target (and thus simulating corrective fire) or some form of scalar which allows a function of increased precision over time to 'walk it in' to the objective. This can be scripted or simulated as it already is via groups moving into trigger zones, but allowing for it based on the approach as in Lock On with the additional computation of appropiate compensation for 'leading the objective'

 

- An expansion of the scripted failures menu to allow gradual failures in the hydraulics systems as is often seen in missions versus an a total one, as well as less often seen partial failures such as high/low oil pressure, transmission or engine degradation, or computer systems.

 

- The completion of the INU correction systems or inaccuracy over time necessitating their utilization. I have read this is not a high priority to fully implement, which is understandable.

 

As an aesthetic, a feature missed from another simulation (Apache/Havoc and Comanche/Hokum) is the canopy raindrops and weather sounds in the cockpit. I can't attest to how complex this would be to implement, though I have read it is achieved through an animated texture. With the modeling of windshield wipers for the viewscreen and the Shkval, it is a sorely missed extra.

 

In the same vein, it would be most appreciated to revise the 'spotlight' effect, especially at long ranges. It is perhaps a layover of the graphics engine from Lock On that illumination bombs rendered on to the terrain suffer bizarre artifacts at range regardless of anisotropy versus altitude. Also, the ability to increase the illumination of such 'spotlights' especially for one's own helicopter, which seems rather 'anemic' as has been discussed by others.

 

Perhaps least important among my aesthetic desires is the ability to script sound events solely on the VHF-1 R-828 system. It is perhaps superficial given most missions 'simulate' the functioning of a FAC or ground forces communications via scripting triggers throughout a mission. But, like the raindrops as an additional 'ambiance', it would be nice to utilize a system akin to the 'radio stations' on the VHF-2 rotary to either selectively allow or disallow their listening on the whims of a mission designer. It is understandably superfluous, but perhaps simply to allow the use of a underutilized function of the simulation.

 

After five months, that's all I could think of and all I could want. It's another testament to the consideration the developers have provided to this simulation and the community, and I thank you for your time.

Edited June 2, 2009 by Strekaya