DCS Features Wish List

[Distiler]

Automatic pressing of collective brake when the collective is moved (maintaining also the possibility of manual pressing the collective brake).

Edited June 3, 2009 by Distiler

[nemises]

....

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.

 

Excellent suggestions all

[jctrnacty]

- 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.

 

It´s easy to say to wingman attack my target. Never had a problem with this.

[connos]

Your wingman to report weapon status.

Also to report which weapon is going to use before he engage.

[th3flyboy]

A few things I would like implemented:

 

Ground vehicle/ship/infantry skins:

Allow for things such as different BDU patterns, and different Camos for the various land and sea vehicles. You don't see a green M1A2 in iraq after all :P

 

Infantry for ALL sides:

Screwing around with the editor I noticed that the UK has no infantry... What's up with that?

 

The ability to call in arty and CAS strikes.

 

The ability to have infantry parachuting and fast roping into battle.

 

Pre built templates for unit groups. Take some of the common and known group setups for the various units and countries and set them up prefab.

 

Pistol for the pilot:

Come on, first of all, why does no one attack a pilot on the ground, second why can't he shoot back...

 

Native betty option: Just like in LOMAC.

 

More complete listings of units per side:

It's kind of boring to only see 2 aircraft for the UK side. or for that matter only a few kinds of ground troops....

 

Specops units:

Why are there no SF units, snipers, medics, combat engineers, minefields and layers and breachers, and placeable pilots...

 

Garrisoning in buildings

This would improve gameplay by allowing for infantry to fight from within buildings, and thereby allowing for them to shoot at you from within a building, making it a bit harder to take them down...

[joey45]

Screwing around with the editor I noticed that the UK has no infantry... What's up with that?

More complete listings of units per side:

It's kind of boring to only see 2 aircraft for the UK side. or for that matter only a few kinds of ground troops....

so, whats new.

[Guest RR]

My only wish for DCS:BS*

 

*you cant even just say BS instead of DCS:BS, could be missunderstood in some situations :D

 

ok, i'm missing one thing in black shark, other issues like bugs or AI will be worked on in the future, new aircrafts are coming, so what could my wish be?

 

give us a campaign system that works at least like the one of falcon allied force! this campaign system is almost 11 years old, but i never found a better one.

 

i would just love to work with the DCS Aircrafts, graphics and realism within such a great campaign system, AND i would quit allied force if an f-16 would be included also in the future ;)

 

so all pilots out there that know and love the AF campaign system, support that wish :)

 

always happy landings,

RR

[GGTharos]

Pistol for the pilot:

Come on, first of all, why does no one attack a pilot on the ground, second why can't he shoot back...

 

Because it's a flight simulator, not an infantry simulator.

 

Specops units:

Why are there no SF units, snipers, medics, combat engineers, minefields and layers and breachers, and placeable pilots...

 

Garrisoning in buildings

This would improve gameplay by allowing for infantry to fight from within buildings, and thereby allowing for them to shoot at you from within a building, making it a bit harder to take them down...

 

See above.

[th3flyboy]

Because it's a flight simulator, not an infantry simulator.

 

 

 

See above.

 

Tharos, Even though it isn't an infantry sim, remember these things, everything adds to realism when done correctly, and as such, medics, maybe not, however things such as Snipers are a must, as snipers have been known to shoot down helis with their rifles. Furthermore, SF would be useful as a unit to be used as sort of an option for things such as SF team support, among other things. I could really see SF taking hold when the A-10C module is out, as it's generally known that SF are used to designate targets on the ground for air support. Furthermore, combat engineers could be used to implement things such as mine clearing and bridge laying, which would be nice to see if there were ever a dynamic campaign implemented.

 

As for placeable pilots, this would allow for making CSAR missions. And for garrisoning, although it wouldn't be as major of an issue as a SAM site, a garrisoned building still can be a pain in the @$$ for a pilot, and sometimes air support is called in to flush enemies out of buildings.

 

Regarding the pilot, I see it like this, rather than just simulate the flight aspect up until ejection, make there consequences for ejecting and not making it to friendly territory or getting rescued, as such you would set it up to add the E&E portion of pilot training being useful. If you have ever read the book "Return With Honor" by Scott O'Grady, you would understand just what kind of stuff downed pilots have to deal with to survive behind enemy lines.

[GGTharos]

Remember this, every little feature you want that is NOT part of flight simulation either DELAYS the flight sim part or DETRACTS from it. It's going to be either a trade for time, or a trade for features. And it will be a significant trade.

 

Maybe you'll see them one day, I see them as extremely low priority.

[RedTiger]

Tharos, Even though it isn't an infantry sim....

 

Let me introduce you to my awesome pal! His name is "out of scope". Say hi, "out of scope"!

 

;)

 

I think the best test for determining what feature would be useful for DCS is to remember that the series is supposed to support ED's pursuit of military contracts. Think about a feature you find interesting or think is useful. Would a military client also find it interesting or useful?

 

While doing something like making consequences for ejecting over enemy territory or even simulating your pilot's survival and escape as he soaks up moisture from leaves with a spounge and eats earthworms would have a certain element of fun to it, it isn't likely to be something a military client would be interested in. And IMO, the chances are it also wouldn't be very realistic.

 

Remember that military training is just that, training. Sometimes an exercise could be run again giving the "morts" an opportunity to improve. I've even heard of cases where the whole simulation is stopped, morts are "resurrected" and allowed to try again. The idea is that you will learn more from actually trying again than staying dead and twiddling your thumbs while the rest of the exercise goes on without you!

 

Some of what you're talking about is simply out of the scope of a flight simulator. The objective is to teach you how to fly and fight in an aircraft, not how to hobble your injured virtual pilot around the country side as he tries to evade a bunch pissed-off militia. I realize that I'm picking on just one of your ideas, but I think it still helps to apply this kind of thinking to others. :)

Edited June 9, 2009 by RedTiger

[kraai498]

Hi all,

 

As mentioned in my previous question on the forum, i would like to see more simulated weather information, like an ATIS channel.

That would be nice, specially when departing or arrive at any airport, even in free flight. Landing into wind is one of the important parts, but i also want to know exactly when anti icing is needed etc.

 

I hope this can be integrated in any patch, still i want to say i love the blackshark sim as it is now, thx for that :)

 

greetings.

[RedTiger]

Here's my wish/request/idea:

 

For DCS: Eagle, there needs to be an additional start-up option besides ramp, taxi, and runway. It should be called "Zulu Barn" and it should place the jet in the hanger cocked and ready to be scrambled for intercept!

[GGTharos]

Complete with 'run to plane from barracks' simulation :D

[LukeFF]

While doing something like making consequences for ejecting over enemy territory or even simulating your pilot's survival and escape as he soaks up moisture from leaves with a spounge and eats earthworms would have a certain element of fun to it, it isn't likely to be something a military client would be interested in. And IMO, the chances are it also wouldn't be very realistic.

 

This type of feature could be simulated in a much more simplistic manner and yet still satisfy players of the game. In IL-2, the campaign engine simply factors in proximity to enemy units when determining whether a bailed-out pilot has been captured or not. Land too close to enemy units - pilot captured, simple as that. Now, something like that I think would be perfectly fine for DCS.

[RedTiger]

This type of feature could be simulated in a much more simplistic manner and yet still satisfy players of the game. In IL-2, the campaign engine simply factors in proximity to enemy units when determining whether a bailed-out pilot has been captured or not. Land too close to enemy units - pilot captured, simple as that. Now, something like that I think would be perfectly fine for DCS.

 

Yes, that would work well, but think about this; we already have pilot deaths recorded. While it would probably be easy to have the pilot's captured or MIA status recorded (Falcon 4.0 does this), how meaningful is this really? I don't know about you, but I tend to look at pilot deaths as little more than a blemish on my record. It doesn't stop me from trying the mission over or progressing to the next one. So if my pilot's captured, I'm just going to either hit the rewind button or magically rescue him in time for the next mission! MIA vs. death isn't important to me beyond a kind of "gee wizz" sort of stat. Fun to have, not required.

Edited June 9, 2009 by RedTiger

[joey45]

Complete with 'run to plane from barracks' simulation :D

 

or those little electric carts type things to race to the plane with...

[RedTiger]

Complete with 'run to plane from barracks' simulation :D

 

I'm hoping they get the FPAFM (fireman's pole advanced friction model) fully tested and correctly implemented. :lol:

[joey45]

That can be misunderstood in sooooooooooooo many ways...

[LukeFF]

Yes, that would work well, but think about this; we already have pilot deaths recorded. While it would probably be easy to have the pilot's captured or MIA status recorded (Falcon 4.0 does this), how meaningful is this really? I don't know about you, but I tend to look at pilot deaths as little more than a blemish on my record. It doesn't stop me from trying the mission over or progressing to the next one. So if my pilot's captured, I'm just going to either hit the rewind button or magically rescue him in time for the next mission! MIA vs. death isn't important to me beyond a kind of "gee wizz" sort of stat. Fun to have, not required.

 

For those that play "Dead is Dead" type campaigns it's a nice feature to have.

[th3flyboy]

Any chance of allowing fastrope and paradrop insertions for the transport vehicles carrying infantry? This would allow for the simulation of airborne invasions. Also what about amphibious vehicles for beach landings. Also it would be nice to have simulation of the aircraft's gun jamming and stores failing to separate from the aircraft (a major threat to airmen). Finally, the ability to load infantry into APCs and Transports would be nice to have.

[RedTiger]

That can be misunderstood in sooooooooooooo many ways...

 

Well sir, why do you think I posted it? :megalol: Humor is best when it is like Pac Man -- many levels. :)

[McVittees]

It must already be in here, but I couldn't find it in a search so here's another wish from me:

 

Please make the chat window in multiplayer a bar instead of a window! If you want to type a msg you have to open that 'orible window and you can't see anything.

 

While we're on the subject, voice comms integrated into DCS would be fantastic as we don't all want to join a clan just be able to talk to other players. I think this might be asking for too much, but hey, this is a wish list! ;)

[Ali Fish]

i wish i wish i wish for a..... a CSAR equiped addon helicopter. Yep a seperate study sim based heli modelled to DCS standard. i want to rescue ! asides that as an element of military ops. this arena imo should be simulated in DCS to a high degree as much as any other combat based ops.

[AldoUSMC]

Player AFAC / FAC-A Capability

 

:idea: Would like to be able to perform duties as FAC-A (Forward Air Controller- Airborne) or AFAC as described in DCS BS. Ability to call in rotary wing and fixed wing Close Air Support on a target or Cannon/Rocket Artillery or ship based fires onto a target or target area. Maybe I could target something with the Shkval and send that target data link to a firing battery through the "\" key menu as a possible solution/option to direct AI aircraft/naval gunfire ships/ground weapons.... Also, the editor currently has available the S-8TsM (target marker) rocket in the B-8V20 pods so it's already modeled (though 40 smoke rounds may be too much/excessive so maybe add a load out option for two 7-round B-8V7 pods with S-8TsM rockets loaded). The S-8TsM also could also aid in marking targets for wingmen or ground units within visual range of the S-8TsM smoke if a flag or rule could be created that "if a unit fires S-8TsM rockets other friendlies within visual range engage that area or specifically search that area for targets to engage." I understand that AI craft can be given the AFAC/FAC-A mission right now...just need to implement Player's ability to be FAC-A now it would seem...