Hind tempting, obviously, but what exactly are we going to do with it?

[Lovcar]

Да парни.Прочитав выше изложенное, я с вами соглашус)

[monkie]

If you have to ask, you'll never know.

[Fri13]

On 5/30/2021 at 6:11 PM, Northstar98 said:

 

Yes, I remember doing the beach interdiction in the Viggen, and the BMP-2s were more effective at air defence than the dedicated air defence units that were present.

 

One day we get ground units to be blind what happens outside if they can't hear or see. They can't aim at you unless you fly straight at you and they know exactly where to look when you attack.

 

Suddenly mainly helicopters become engaged by BMP or LAV-25, maybe a A-10 at low level flying.

 

A Viggen flying 10 m above trees and it becomes almost invulnerable, and then Mi-24P similar way as long you maintain either range or speed.

 

But all again needs to be balanced for realism, ground units capable to hide in forest, make them extremely difficult to spot like in reality (< 1500 meters to spot a vehicle sitting still at open, < 200-500 meters when edge of forest etc, FLIR useless, optical targeting systems mostly...) and that means you go to drop laser guided weapons designated by ground units because you have no idea what you are attacking.

 

So one doesn't need BMP shooting up in air when you can't see them.

 

And it would make Mi-24P so much fun to do those rocket attacks to area X degrees and X meters from smoke marked area.

 

- Do you see smoke?

- I see a yellow and red smoke.

- From yellow, heading 155° and 300 meters to white one floor house. Destroy it.

- Coming around, attacking in two.

Edited June 1, 2021 by Fri13

[GunSlingerAUS]

To be honest, I reckon I'll easily get a solid 50 hours of enjoyment just out of doing standard flight procedures - start-up, taxiing, nav, IFR, etc. To me that justifies the cost of the module already. However, to use it as a combat platform in the way it was intended, I think flying with a squadron with custom-built missions will be the only way to go. Which is basically the same as every other DCS module. 

[Stratos]

Wouldnt be easy for ED to tweak the ground units (non air defense) and greatly reduce the range they engage air units? I can imagine being in a BMP (try it in ArmA) youre too limited to see and track enemy air units.

[cfrag]

8 minutes ago, GunSlingerAUS said:

To be honest, I reckon I'll easily get a solid 50 hours of enjoyment just out of doing standard flight procedures - start-up, taxiing, nav, IFR, etc. To me that justifies the cost of the module already. However, to use it as a combat platform in the way it was intended, I think flying with a squadron with custom-built missions will be the only way to go. Which is basically the same as every other DCS module. 

 

Indeed. I've clocked over 1500 hours in DCS and well got my money's worth out of every module I have; I spend very little time agonizing over the question if I should purchase a new module: I just do.

 

With that being said, even custom missions can suffer strongly from brain dead troops, simply because they force the mission designer into uncomfortable setups, call for silly compositions, and make some usually simple things eithe impossible or convoluted. The hoops you have to jump through to get a simple speed boat patrolling a stretch of the river are... unfortunate, with no guarantee that it'll work, or continue working with the next release. So even custom-built (my mission to drop and pick up troops contains some 1000 lines custom written Lua) missions may not fit the bill. "All" we are asking for is a bit of relief, to make troop behaviour more reliable and predictable. And explicable.

 

[GunSlingerAUS]

4 minutes ago, cfrag said:

 

Indeed. I've clocked over 1500 hours in DCS and well got my money's worth out of every module I have; I spend very little time agonizing over the question if I should purchase a new module: I just do.

 

With that being said, even custom missions can suffer strongly from brain dead troops, simply because they force the mission designer into uncomfortable setups, call for silly compositions, and make some usually simple things eithe impossible or convoluted. The hoops you have to jump through to get a simple speed boat patrolling a stretch of the river are... unfortunate, with no guarantee that it'll work, or continue working with the next release. So even custom-built (my mission to drop and pick up troops contains some 1000 lines custom written Lua) missions may not fit the bill. "All" we are asking for is a bit of relief, to make troop behaviour more reliable and predictable. And explicable.

 

 

Jeebus, 1000 lines of code for such a simple task is, well, mind-blowing. I am atrocious with the mission editor, so leave it to more talented folk like you to create them. After hearing the amount of coding you had to do for that kind of mission, I'm even less tempted to try it out. So, from us non-mission building folks, thanks for giving us so much more to do in DCS!

[Lurker]

Well I hope I will be able to use it in multiplayer, with a friend or with an AI gunner, so I can engage FARP defenses (and possibly land a small squad of troops to capture FARPs\Airfields). I mean I do that with the Huey and Mi8 already and it's a blast, when I don't get shot down. Well, it's a blast when I get shot down as well, but a different kind of blast...

 

I think as long as the mission designers take the limitations of DCS and the helicopter itself into the equation it will "kind of" do it's job. I say kind of, because obviously a new level of ground modeling, weapon damage modeling and AI and unit interaction is required for this chopper (or any chopper really) to really shine in DCS World. 

[Fri13]

1 hour ago, GunSlingerAUS said:

To be honest, I reckon I'll easily get a solid 50 hours of enjoyment just out of doing standard flight procedures - start-up, taxiing, nav, IFR, etc. To me that justifies the cost of the module already. However, to use it as a combat platform in the way it was intended, I think flying with a squadron with custom-built missions will be the only way to go. Which is basically the same as every other DCS module. 

 

IIRC the Hind costed to me less than 40€ and that was without any ED miles. 

I was very surprised for a such low price that is nothing for any enjoyment time.

 

1-2 hours playtime and it has paid it value IMHO.

 

I can put more money for so many stupid things that I don't want to or care for.

 

 

[Bartacomus]

You guys arent answering question.  We need Fast Missions that cater to Helo Objectives.

 

One click and i can fly a SP mission in a Warthog, perfect for Warthogs.  I can JTAC precision targets, i can listen to UHF calls and use offset waypoints to find other targets.
I can fly CAP in the Mirage (if enemy forces start on the ground, its even better than MP sometimes).

But even the Black Shark.. is given the same mission as Warthog.  A waypoint into the mix, and back. (with no datalink support, an in 10 years ive never heard anyone use Offset, or Bulls, and Black Shark in the same sentence)

 

We need random single player objectives, that cater to Helicopters.   "Land here, disembark"   "Pick up here"   "Land by destroyed tank group"  "clear landing zone XX"  "Interdict column on this road"  "Pick up downed pilot"

 

[lmp]

I would say the entire Fast Mission Generator should be greatly expanded. Who knows, maybe with the dynamic campaign engine they'll redo this feature as well, I can see how there's a lot of shared functionality.

[Fri13]

1 hour ago, GunSlingerAUS said:

 

Jeebus, 1000 lines of code for such a simple task is, well, mind-blowing. I am atrocious with the mission editor, so leave it to more talented folk like you to create them. After hearing the amount of coding you had to do for that kind of mission, I'm even less tempted to try it out. So, from us non-mission building folks, thanks for giving us so much more to do in DCS!

 

Well there are so many things you need scripting to do basic things. 

 

IMHO, scripting is extremely important to be possible. But it should never be required for the player to get even believable skirmish to happen.

 

We do not have AI in game. It simply doesn't exist.

 

Drop a unit on ground and it does what?

- will check is there a "opposition" inside it detection radius.

- Checks is there LOS to them.

- start shooting at them if both true.

- run the weapons proper firing rate, ammunition and rearming timers.

- If damaged, turn randomly and move X seconds to scatter around for 600 seconds.

- If damaged X % then pop some smoke once.

 

That is the basic ground unit function.

Anything from that adds more requirements for each group that is wanted to do anything else than those and follow easily made waypoints (automatically selected "Add" for waypoints).

 

So anyone can easily make groups move a specified path and engage in quick combat by their those abilities.

 

But try anything more complex, like get units to wait in ambush position, wait enemy to get close enough (closer engagement range/line) and then open fire, and withdraw to cover and move to a new further distance location if the enemy would chase them....

Then it becomes a real challenge as it requires scripting.

 

Basically players are required to learn not just LUA script language, but as well programming how to program a basic AI logic for their needs.

 

It is not a user friendly expectations.

Not at all.

 

IMHO it is ED job to make a actual AI, utilizing a human logic and military tactics from a single unit behavior to command structure. 

 

You have a someone who issues you commands, and you have troops that follow those orders. 

Every single unit has their basic moral, fear, will and logic. 

Simple key elements.

 

Like if you have 3:1 ratio of firepower then you attack enemy. If enemy has 3:1 then you avoid engagement.

If you have 1:1 or 1:2 then you are in stale mate.

 

This is based to experience that how much you will lose troops in engagement if you don't have ratio advantage. As results can be with 2:1 that you will win the engagement but you have lost 80% of your troops to do so. 3:1 ratio and you are losing 30-40% of your troops. 4:1 and you lose 10-20%.

 

If you have to advance in enemy territory where you have multiple engagements like that, you are not going to survive with 3:1 ratio as after first engagement you are not capable perform tasking forward without reinforcement. Why you want reinforcement in first place to minimize losses and crush the enemy.

 

And if player is expected to program the AI logic of such, it is then not really suitable for flight simulator.

 

A multirole fighter can drop a bomb through clouds to stationary target, but helicopter pilot can't get enjoyment to attack in enemy positions alone. If you are usually suppose to fly with 16-20 other to create air assault, then it doesn't make fun experience if it is just a messy random mob that gets shot down etc.

 

 

[Extranajero]

The Hind is effectively a much, much less capable and survivable KA-50. I expect that unless it's being used in missions that are specifically tailored to it then what everyone will do with it is get shot down very quickly
But tailoring missions will still be difficult with ground units that don't react to suppression or splash damage and just sit there firing deadly accurate shots even with a whole pod of rockets coming back their way. Unless you enjoy shooting at trucks, it'll be good at that

I've bought it though because I'll enjoy flying it. I don't have any illusions about it's capability with the current state of DCS AI however.

[Stratos]

11 hours ago, Extranajero said:

The Hind is effectively a much, much less capable and survivable KA-50. I expect that unless it's being used in missions that are specifically tailored to it then what everyone will do with it is get shot down very quickly
But tailoring missions will still be difficult with ground units that don't react to suppression or splash damage and just sit there firing deadly accurate shots even with a whole pod of rockets coming back their way. Unless you enjoy shooting at trucks, it'll be good at that

I've bought it though because I'll enjoy flying it. I don't have any illusions about it's capability with the current state of DCS AI however.

Totally right, how sad to see the sniper AAA and APCs, the ultrabrave infantry, the lack of frag damage, etc.

[Bartacomus]

doesnt have to be complicated AI.

  Jet gets shots down.. ejected pilots pops smoke..  Board helicopter within X range.   

That would single handedly make single player DCS a blast.  Each mission they could fall in trees, or city, in the middle of enemy forces, in the middle of friendly forces.  
 

no AI, just 1 variable.  And Helo gameplay would have purpose.    Mock operations even.  When a friendly unit is hit, it opens up a land here trigger and a return to base trigger. 

 

Id do it myself, but the mission editor doesnt seem intuitive to me. Maybe its the wording, and GUI.. i cant seem to figure it out.  
(and random missions is what makes it fun)

 

 

Edited June 2, 2021 by Bartacomus
added info

[Lurker]

I don't understand why fragmentation damage is so hard to implement into DCS World code? Just give certain (vulnerable) units a second invisible hitbox, that surrounds their normal hitbox at a certain range and depending on where they get hit within that invisible hitbox by fragmentation munition, they take a certain amount of damage. It's very simplistic, but it would work well enough for our purposes. Implementing frag-damage would make rocket attacks much more effective against infantry and lightly armored units, which would singlehandedly improve Helo gameplay by at least 50%. 

Edited June 2, 2021 by Lurker

[Bartacomus]

Im fairly sure it does.  You can put a JDAM inbetween a group of Gaz trucks, and they will catch fire. You dont have to make contact.  Same with the 300pounder MAVs.   

Id like to see some shotgun pattern splash visual effects.  The rockets themselves, just aint accurate or powerful.

[Lurker]

9 minutes ago, Bartacomus said:

Im fairly sure it does.  You can put a JDAM inbetween a group of Gaz trucks, and they will catch fire. You dont have to make contact.  Same with the 300pounder MAVs.   

Id like to see some shotgun pattern splash visual effects.  The rockets themselves, just aint accurate or powerful.

 

Hmmm that's interesting. I don't think I've noticed this, but I will take your word for it as I don't do a lot of ground-pounding (this will hopefully change with the Hind). Maybe increase the fragmentation damage of the rockets themselves? (at least against certain units, like infantry and lightly armored vehicles?) I think the accuracy of the rockets is fine though. Visuals can be implemented later (and are not really that important really, fragmentation damage is usually a small shower of particles and from the air can't really be seen apart from the initial impact point)

Edited June 2, 2021 by Lurker

[Stratos]

16 minutes ago, Bartacomus said:

Im fairly sure it does.  You can put a JDAM inbetween a group of Gaz trucks, and they will catch fire. You dont have to make contact.  Same with the 300pounder MAVs.   

Id like to see some shotgun pattern splash visual effects.  The rockets themselves, just aint accurate or powerful.

That's blast damage, frag damage is not modeled at the moment.

[Deadnine]

On 5/28/2021 at 6:19 PM, AvroLanc said:

Now that the Mi-24 is looking both pretty close to release and pretty itself to look at, I'm wondering exactly how I'm going to use it. At least from a SP perspective?

 

Obviously DCS has it's genesis in Black Shark, so there's something to say for Russian attack helo gamplay, but the Hind is unlike any release in the last few years. Creating missions/scenarios for the multi-role fast jets is easy. They have a wide range of mission roles and creating reasonably authentic standalone SP missions is going to be more straight forward than for the HIND.

 

For the jets, you can visualize and fly a simple SEAD / CAS / STRIKE / BARCAP etc and the result will be a close representation of the exact role the jet was designed for (DCS AI being a limiting factor). None of those missions rely on the combined arms nature of the Soviet doctrine the HIND was envisioned for. Currently the DCS AI and mission editor isn't capable of showcasing the HINDs role to the maximum extent. Add that to the fact passenger/air assault capability isn't coming till later in EA and it'll be a struggle to create realistic missions to fly the HIND that way it was supposed to be flown. 

 

The whole combined arms air assault doctrine is fundamental to the Mi-24 i.e. the idea that they would hover behind ridgelines and use ATGMs in the pure anti-tank role, ala Apache/Lynx etc is not really how they would be been deployed I believe. The idea of wide area suppression and shock tactics being more it's thing. I.e. difficult to coordinate in DCS.

 

After Hornet, Supercarrier, Raven One etc, how are we going to become immersed in this new role? Anyone else same concerns?

 

Easy Quick mission Scenario 

You and 1-3 friends take off from a Farp 

Navigate to a Village Held by Well armen Insurgents.......Take up a High orbit and Switch between  Fast Attack runs-High cover/Overwatch 

 

That is what Russia been doing with them since the Cold war turned Semi-heated  and  Westerlund Tank onslaughts in Fulda  is on hold 

[m4ti140]

On 5/29/2021 at 1:34 AM, Mower said:

Target for my Hornet...carry on

I've been shot down by Gazelles enough times to laugh at this statement. R-60s go brrrrrrrrrrrr

On 5/29/2021 at 1:34 AM, Mower said:

Target for my Hornet...carry on

I've been shot down by Gazelles enough times to laugh at this statement. R-60s go brrrrrrrrrrrr

On 5/29/2021 at 1:34 AM, Mower said:

Target for my Hornet...carry on

I've been shot down by Gazelles enough times to laugh at this statement. R-60s go brrrrrrrrrrrr

[Steel Jaw]

If a rotor puke is shooting down your Bug, you in the wrong (v) profession.

[sublime]

Alright everyone you know what that means.  Bounty on mower. Reward for proof of killing mower in a helo.

[Johnr666]

I have the Huey, Gazelle and the Mi8 and enjoy them all because each is different in every way.

 

Should I buy the Hind which appears to be very similar to the Mi8 so may disappoint me.

 

What are the thoughts of Mi8 owners about buying the Hind?

 

Cheers

[CrazyGman]

23 minutes ago, Johnr666 said:

I have the Huey, Gazelle and the Mi8 and enjoy them all because each is different in every way.

 

Should I buy the Hind which appears to be very similar to the Mi8 so may disappoint me.

 

What are the thoughts of Mi8 owners about buying the Hind?

 

Cheers

I mean there are similarities to be sure. The Hind will be much better in attack with either petrovich or a second human pilot. The weapons and range you can engage at will be better as well as gunnery and sighting. The Hind will be significantly faster. Will have 4-5km range ATMs and much heavery rockets and bombs, and then later in early access be able to carry R-60m's and be able to provide air defense roles.

 

The Mi-8 will still excell in troop and cargo transport and sling loading.