Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR), Survival kits, and maybe Prisoner of War (If you have Combined Arms), and, most Importantly, Freely Walking around

[Razorjet XII]

DCS World is great. But, lets say you were splashed on both engines and was hurtling towards the ground at 700 KT. You think about it, and make the decision to eject. However, after you eject, there is not much you can do. I suggest that there could be Search and Rescue aircraft  (UH-1, as an example) in your coalition, that will attempt to extract you, (With AI and player support) and take you to the nearest friendly base. This brings me onto my second point. Survival kits. Maybe after you eject, you can access your survival kit to use a survival radio and other tools that could help you survive while waiting for CSAR. There could also be a prisoners of war function, where if a player has Combined Arms, they could send units to scout the area for the pilot. If found, you can be taken as a prisoner of war, and cannot be rescued. This option is completely optional to the player. Now, my final point, the most important one, Walking Around Freely. There should be a function to get out of an Aircraft without ejecting, and getting into an Aircraft (When possible). The only limits should be that it is an Aircraft in your coalition, It is not in use, and the ejector seat is still there (Whereas for WW2 planes this doesn't apply). Theses are a few of feature requests, I hope Eagle Dynamics reads and maybe implement them. Thank you.

Edited October 10, 2021 by Razorjet XII

[cfrag]

I believe that's an understandable and common request: You want some FPS functionality in DCS. It has been requested before, with a sort-of consensus that a) it may be an interesting side show, b) the world would require a significant gfx upgrade or DCS can't hold a candle quality-wise against the likes of Cryengine nor Unreal, 3) DCS world is huge compared to those (Cryengine is 40x40km, DCS 400x400, that's 100 times bigger 4) (biggest issue) infantry and airframes don't mix well because of the speed differential involved. On foot you can cross perhaps 10 km in one hour. A plane crosses that distance in a few seconds during take-off. So if you MP with your friends with you on foot, and them in the air, you wont's interact much. Why not then simply play an infantry game yourself (with a much better experience), rather than be frustrated in DCS waiting for your friends to drop a stand-off weapon from 40 miles downrange, never seeing them, and never be able to interact with them except perhaps telling them where you are? Planes and Boots don't mix well. It's already really difficult to create MP missions that mix Helicopters and Planes in any fun way. So 5) many people would prefer ED to focus on other aspects before turning to FPS.

 

Case in point: I wrote an MP mission a few months ago that, when you were shot down, you had to wait for one of your friends to come and rescue you (using a Hind or Huey) - the mission generates a CSAR and places an ELT on you so people can home in on your radio. Consensus is: it's not fun at all to wait 45 minutes for someone to pick you up, and then wait another 30 minutes to be ferried back to base before you can jump in the next cockpit. And that's supposing that you ejected less that 100 km from your base - or ingress to your downed pilot and return will take even longer. 

 

What looks like an interesting idea on paper doesn't always translate to fun in-game. We now use a compromise: Each side has a limited pool of pilots, and when you are shot down, a pilot is subtracted, and a CSAR mission is created that someone can opt to fly. If successful, your side re-gains a lost pilot. You lose the mission if your side has no more pilots in the pool. Oh, and the enemy can also home in on your ELT, so CSARs have to be started within the first 15 minutes, or the pilots is toast. 

 

WRT walkabout - yes, that is definitely something I would like to see. Hop into a helicopter, and even humble Caucasus becomes a stunningly beautiful region to explore for hours on end. Walking may be a little bit too slow, but if you could fly your chopper, land, get out and walk around, that would be wonderful - maybe for purely touristic purposes for me, but still . DCS World is beautiful, no doubt about that. That being said, there are some rather urgent other aspects in DCS that ED may invest into upgrading before pouring resources into this.

 

Edited October 9, 2021 by cfrag

[SharpeXB]

If you notice, most multiplayer games have about 12 players in them, not enough to engage in something complex and coordinated like this. The vast vast majority of players will simply respawn after ejecting and not wander around DCS world for hours on foot. 

So this feature would pretty much go unused. You can already walk around after parachuting to the ground, for what it’s worth. 

[Riojano]

58 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I believe that's an understandable and common request: You want some FPS functionality in DCS. It has been requested before, with a sort-of consensus that a) it may be an interesting side show, b) the world would require a significant gfx upgrade or DCS can't hold a candle quality-wise against the likes of Cryengine nor Unreal, 3) DCS world is huge compared to those (Cryengine is 40x40km, DCS 400x400, that's 100 times bigger 4) (biggest issue) infantry and airframes don't mix well because of the speed differential involved. On foot you can cross perhaps 10 km in one hour. A plane crosses that distance in a few seconds during take-off. So if you MP with your friends with you on foot, and them in the air, you wont's interact much. Why not then simply play an infantry game yourself (with a much better experience), rather than be frustrated in DCS waiting for your friends to drop a stand-off weapon from 40 miles downrange, never seeing them, and never be able to interact with them except perhaps telling them where you are? Planes and Boots don't mix well. It's already really difficult to create MP missions that mix Helicopters and Planes in any fun way. So 5) many people would prefer ED to focus on other aspects before turning to FPS.

 

JTAC, CAS (for planes and helicopters), CSAR... lot of things can be done if doed well

 

Case in point: I wrote an MP mission a few months ago that, when you were shot down, you had to wait for one of your friends to come and rescue you (using a Hind or Huey) - the mission generates a CSAR and places an ELT on you so people can home in on your radio. Consensus is: it's not fun at all to wait 45 minutes for someone to pick you up, and then wait another 30 minutes to be ferried back to base before you can jump in the next cockpit. And that's supposing that you ejected less that 100 km from your base - or ingress to your downed pilot and return will take even longer. 

 

If you can do some inf play that "wait" for 45 min pick up trying to not be killed or captured, senaking to a pick up zone, etc, can be funny too. the 30 mins flying home are always funny talking.

 

 

 

[Nahen]

Mix DCS with Arma would be the most beautiful multiplayer game that could be created. Servers that would work "non-stop" on which would take place endless wars with the use of infantry, vehicles and aviation ... ehhh you can dream ... In fact, Arma already gives a substitute for something like this - unfortunately it "too small" terrain for use of jet airplanes.

I am sure that there would be thousands of players who would fill these hundreds of square kilometers of maps by doing what they enjoy the most. Some would fly fighters, others drive tanks, transporters, jeeps, fighting with each other and calling for A-10 / Su-25 support when they needed it. Special forces transferred by helicopters would do their job, being able to count on the support of artillery, aviation and vehicles.

There are many people who can walk for hours in Arma3, so they would be happy to do it here as well. A shot down pilot, if he only wanted, could wait for the CSAR mission - if no, cant be forced it- but surely there would be as many people willing to wait for the rescue as those who would like to respawn in the cockpit in three seconds.

Maybe in 100 years my grandchildren will see such a game;)

[cfrag]

@Riojano, please afford me the curtesy to not alter quoted text.

 

1 hour ago, Riojano said:

JTAC, CAS (for planes and helicopters), CSAR... lot of things can be done if doed well

 

Yes. Anything that can be done well can also be done. That's a given. The trick is to do it in the first place. So far, in DCS, it hasn't for the person who is the objective of a CSAR. And TBH, one of my most boring experiences in DCS I had was lasing targets as ground based JTAC with CA. So maybe it's just me.

 

1 hour ago, Riojano said:

If you can do some inf play that "wait" for 45 min pick up trying to not be killed or captured, senaking to a pick up zone, etc, can be funny too. 

 

That's fine. Most people who signed up to DCS to fly (they are downed pilots in this scenario) would probably disagree since they want to fly, not play hide and seek with a bunch of generic NPC that kill on sight with sniper accuracy. Since pilots eject in unscripted locations, all enemy search missions will be quite generic (boring). Currently, the action would pretty much boil down to: get your pilot to a location where they can avoid LOS to the enemy, then wait. Negotiating an LZ will increase mission duration. I don't know, it may be mildly interesting the first time. After that, you'd probably prefer flying. Or watching paint dry. I know I do. I'm not about to waste an hour of my very limited quality time waiting for a frigging helo when I could spend the same time dropping fuzed ordnance on some deserving terrorist basterdz.

 

1 hour ago, Riojano said:

the 30 mins flying home are always funny talking.

 

Perhaps. Why don't you just talk then, or simply co-pilot a Huey? That fun time talking can be had without CSAR, and even entirely without playing DCS for that matter. Simply waiting for a helo to RTB is not what my friends deem fun inside the context of DCS, especially the second time or any time thereafter. We tried it. We know. Of course, YMMV.

 

 

[Nipil]

We don't even have proper ATC or cloud's impact on AI in an aviation sim, yet you already want resources to be directed to what basically is something completely different than a flying sim. DCS should not try to be everything at the same time, ED simply doesn't have enough resources to deliver even what they've already pledged in time they'd announced. Also, DCS as it is now is not really suited for infantry gameplay in general. 

 

This is not to say the idea itself is bad, what I mean is it would steal resources from other things which would be much more beneficial for what is first and foremost a flight sim. 

[cfrag]

2 hours ago, Nahen said:

Mix DCS with Arma would be the most beautiful multiplayer game that could be created. Servers that would work "non-stop" on which would take place endless wars with the use of infantry, vehicles and aviation ... ehhh you can dream ... In fact, Arma already gives a substitute for something like this - unfortunately it "too small" terrain for use of jet airplanes

 

That is quite debatable. Fact is, infantry is pretty much cannon fodder in DCS. How much fun do you think it is for you and your friends to drive 30 minutes towards an objective, just to be wiped entirely by a stand-off CBU that was dropped with pinpoint accuracy from a plane that you never saw? Because that would be your main experience as a DCS infantry soldier. Those JSOWs? They have a range of more than 100km. I don't see the fun in being target practice.

 

[SharpeXB]

War is boredom punctuated by terror. Let’s not simulate the boredom part. 

[cfrag]

Just now, SharpeXB said:

War is boredom punctuated by terror. Let’s not simulate the boredom part. 

 

Well, if it's quite alright with you, let's not do the terror part either. 

 

(I know what SharpeXB meant - I'm smartassing here, and simply couldn't resist )

 

[Tippis]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

War is boredom punctuated by terror. Let’s not simulate the boredom part. 

Really? This is quite a turn-around for you given your long history of championing the boredom part and loudly complaining about any and all ideas to cut down on those.  

[Razorjet XII]

On 10/10/2021 at 12:56 AM, cfrag said:

I believe that's an understandable and common request: You want some FPS functionality in DCS. It has been requested before, with a sort-of consensus that a) it may be an interesting side show, b) the world would require a significant gfx upgrade or DCS can't hold a candle quality-wise against the likes of Cryengine nor Unreal, 3) DCS world is huge compared to those (Cryengine is 40x40km, DCS 400x400, that's 100 times bigger 4) (biggest issue) infantry and airframes don't mix well because of the speed differential involved. On foot you can cross perhaps 10 km in one hour. A plane crosses that distance in a few seconds during take-off. So if you MP with your friends with you on foot, and them in the air, you wont's interact much. Why not then simply play an infantry game yourself (with a much better experience), rather than be frustrated in DCS waiting for your friends to drop a stand-off weapon from 40 miles downrange, never seeing them, and never be able to interact with them except perhaps telling them where you are? Planes and Boots don't mix well. It's already really difficult to create MP missions that mix Helicopters and Planes in any fun way. So 5) many people would prefer ED to focus on other aspects before turning to FPS.

 

Case in point: I wrote an MP mission a few months ago that, when you were shot down, you had to wait for one of your friends to come and rescue you (using a Hind or Huey) - the mission generates a CSAR and places an ELT on you so people can home in on your radio. Consensus is: it's not fun at all to wait 45 minutes for someone to pick you up, and then wait another 30 minutes to be ferried back to base before you can jump in the next cockpit. And that's supposing that you ejected less that 100 km from your base - or ingress to your downed pilot and return will take even longer. 

 

What looks like an interesting idea on paper doesn't always translate to fun in-game. We now use a compromise: Each side has a limited pool of pilots, and when you are shot down, a pilot is subtracted, and a CSAR mission is created that someone can opt to fly. If successful, your side re-gains a lost pilot. You lose the mission if your side has no more pilots in the pool. Oh, and the enemy can also home in on your ELT, so CSARs have to be started within the first 15 minutes, or the pilots is toast. 

 

WRT walkabout - yes, that is definitely something I would like to see. Hop into a helicopter, and even humble Caucasus becomes a stunningly beautiful region to explore for hours on end. Walking may be a little bit too slow, but if you could fly your chopper, land, get out and walk around, that would be wonderful - maybe for purely touristic purposes for me, but still . DCS World is beautiful, no doubt about that. That being said, there are some rather urgent other aspects in DCS that ED may invest into upgrading before pouring resources into this.

 

 

I completely agree with this (with an exception of the FPS part), this was just an idea that would be saved until DCS has nothing left to add. Also, I don't think I made this too clear (Sorry), but CSAR is completely optional and you only have to do it if you want to.

Edited October 10, 2021 by Razorjet XII

[Nahen]

On 10/9/2021 at 7:42 PM, cfrag said:

 

That is quite debatable. Fact is, infantry is pretty much cannon fodder in DCS. How much fun do you think it is for you and your friends to drive 30 minutes towards an objective, just to be wiped entirely by a stand-off CBU that was dropped with pinpoint accuracy from a plane that you never saw? Because that would be your main experience as a DCS infantry soldier. Those JSOWs? They have a range of more than 100km. I don't see the fun in being target practice.

 

Hmm, how long will you fly and attack infantry in your Hornet, when on the ground the operator of the S-200 or S-300 will be me and my colleagues? Already, thanks to CombinedArms, the "balance" of the battlefield is completely changed when someone operates SA batteries.

[cfrag]

3 hours ago, Nahen said:

Hmm, how long will you fly and attack infantry in your Hornet, when on the ground the operator of the S-200 or S-300 will be me and my colleagues? Already, thanks to CombinedArms, the "balance" of the battlefield is completely changed when someone operates SA batteries.

I really don't know. Do you really think that operating a SAM battery from an FPS perspective (that's what we are talking about) is going to be exciting? From what I know about that job, it's pretty much just sitting in a cramped enclosure, staring at a screen, and slowly dying from boredom. I expect the game experience in DCS to be similar. You'd man the radar, wait, and maybe you get a contact at 50 klicks after some 45 minutes. Then maybe you push a sequence of buttons when you get launch authority. I don't think many players would willingly submit to that. Plus, I believe I mentioned that many jet jocks would employ standoff munitions, especially if they know a SAM is involved. A JSOW from 45 klicks could do the job probably even if players are manning the S300 command post. 

[SharpeXB]

It’s almost comic that some people think DCS could be made so much more popular by adding these super boring roles to it. Like these recent suggestions:

flying as a non-combat passenger

refueling the aircraft

doing ground crew stuff like rearming the aircraft

wandering lost as a downed pilot in search of rescue

playing as cannon fodder infantry

man if this counts as entertainment for you guys, that’s scary

 

Edited October 16, 2021 by SharpeXB

[MAXsenna]

Nah, haven't you guys tried SAM Simulator?
I think it's free. The GR or something tried it out IIRC.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Northstar98]

12 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

It’s almost comic that some people think DCS could be made so much more popular by adding these super boring roles to it. Like these recent suggestions:

flying as a non-combat passenger

refueling the aircraft

doing ground crew stuff like rearming the aircraft

wandering lost as a downed pilot in search of rescue

playing as cannon fodder infantry

man if this counts as entertainment for you guys, that’s scary

Yes, believe it or not, people have their own ideas for what they find fun and not fun.

Amazing, isn't it?

Edited October 17, 2021 by Northstar98

[cfrag]

59 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Yes, believe it or not, people have their own ideas for what they find fun and not fun.

Amazing, isn't it?

 

It really is, and I find it both surprising and humbling to see games like 'farm sim' or 'train sim' to not only be a thing, but popular and successful. It reminds me of the fact the we as a people have a fantastic variety in taste and preferences; it is a cautionary tale for everyone to not simply assume that everyone agrees with them. And it should also not be used as a license to say that everything goes. I hear people say FPS in DCS could be fun, and I believe that case can be made - I merely think it will not integrate well with aircraft and I would prefer if ED focused their energy on the aircraft-y things first. I'm open to hear the case for a SAM operator or ground personnel module - I would like to know how the game loop would function in those cases. Until then I have to say that it sounds boring. Then again, two years ago I wanted to find out why people love "Euro Truck" so much, believing that I would find it terribly boring. Since so many people enthusiastically approve of it, I figured I was missing a detail. Purchased it. Yup. Boring. Excessively so. For me. Plenty other people disagree for an entire successful franchise to exist. There's even a successful title 'Lawnmowing Sim' on Steam. Go figure. As someone who loves the aircraft aspect in DCS, and who owns the abomination known as 'CA module' I tend to get nervous when people suggest ED do something in a similar ground-forces based vein (mayhaps make CA a compelling module first?).

Ideas a great, a good way to start - and this forum can be a good place to discuss them. Not all good ideas translate into good games, though.

Edited October 17, 2021 by cfrag

[MAXsenna]

It really is, and I find it both surprising and humbling to see games like 'farm sim' or 'train sim' to not only be a thing, but popular and successful. It reminds me of the fact the we as a people have a fantastic variety in taste and preferences; it is a cautionary tale for everyone to not simply assume that everyone agrees with them. And it should also not be used as a license to say that everything goes. I hear people say FPS in DCS could be fun, and I believe that case can be made - I merely think it will not integrate well with aircraft and I would prefer if ED focused their energy on the aircraft-y things first. I'm open to hear the case for a SAM operator or ground personnel module - I would like to know how the game loop would function in those cases. Until then I have to say that it sounds boring. Then again, two years ago I wanted to find out why people love "Euro Truck" so much, believing that I would find it terribly boring. Since so many people enthusiastically approve of it, I figured I was missing a detail. Purchased it. Yup. Boring. Excessively so. For me. Plenty other people disagree for an entire successful franchise to exist. There's even a successful title 'Lawnmowing Sim' on Steam. Go figure. As someone who loves the aircraft aspect in DCS, and who owns the abomination known as 'CA module' I tend to get nervous when people suggest ED do something in a similar ground-forces based vein (mayhaps make CA a compelling module first?).
Ideas a great, a good way to start - and this forum can be a good place to discuss them. Not all good ideas translate into good games, though.

You missed a couple. "Burglar, Drug Dealer (would have thought GTA covered this already ), tank mechanic (should fit right into DCS later), train station, gas station, PC builder etc etc etc).
But you hit the nail on the head.
Imagine a world without diversity. Can't think of a more boring place! Hell?

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Quadg]

37 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Imagine a world without diversity. Can't think of a more boring place! Hell?

 

whats that old russian proverb?

"you go to heaven for the peace and quiet and you go to hell for all the interesting conversations."

the boring place with no diversity would be called heaven...

 

 

[cfrag]

1 hour ago, Desert Fox said:

IMHO there is a line between simming, gaming, playing, having fun and raw "killing time". Such activities are just "fillers", so people got something extremely low effort to do and not let their brains pop out things that might be annoying or inconvenient for them. Those smartphone games or "lawn mowing simulator" are in that category and i feel like having "sitting in a bush" as a kind of "gameplay" element is too. Can achieve the same by just ejecting and then going out for a walk 30 minutes or do the laundry, then come back and re-slot. I see nothing to get here except filling precious life time with a silly distraction for whatever reason.

That's your take on what other people do. I feel their choice of spending quality time is no more nor less valid than ours, and I hold that it's not ours to judge. Ascribing  motives like you seem to do here appears questionable and may call for more reflection. We are all playing games, distraction is the goal, not a side-effect. The effort that goes into playing is immaterial. Just ask my significant other who is currently outside doing what she loves (and I hate): bouldering. Would you agree if she dismissed our sim play as 'low-effort, aural and visual over-stimulation to avoid pondering inconvenient issues'? That's merely how she perceives our loutish pastime of sitting-around-pressing-buttons. We enjoy, unwind. Goal achieved. -- "Jeder nach seiner Fasson" - each to their own, no judgement on "how".

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by cfrag

[MAXsenna]

whats that old russian proverb?
"you go to heaven for the peace and quiet and you go to hell for all the interesting conversations."
the boring place with no diversity would be called heaven...
 
 

Ouch! You may be right!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[cfrag]

2 hours ago, Quadg said:

the boring place with no diversity would be called heaven...

Good one  

... except "L'enfer, c'est les autres"  - so there's no heaven. Just boring hell, and interesting hell. 

Edited October 17, 2021 by cfrag

[SharpeXB]

5 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Yes, believe it or not, people have their own ideas for what they find fun and not fun

Sure but I don’t think most DCS players would like the idea of ED devoting resources towards gameplay roles and features that would likely go unused. 
 

[Nahen]

21 hours ago, cfrag said:

I really don't know. Do you really think that operating a SAM battery from an FPS perspective (that's what we are talking about) is going to be exciting? From what I know about that job, it's pretty much just sitting in a cramped enclosure, staring at a screen, and slowly dying from boredom. I expect the game experience in DCS to be similar. You'd man the radar, wait, and maybe you get a contact at 50 klicks after some 45 minutes. Then maybe you push a sequence of buttons when you get launch authority. I don't think many players would willingly submit to that. Plus, I believe I mentioned that many jet jocks would employ standoff munitions, especially if they know a SAM is involved. A JSOW from 45 klicks could do the job probably even if players are manning the S300 command post. 

As I can see, you have a monopoly on what someone can and does not, likes ...
I don't know if you know, but there are people who play chess, catch fish and I can assure you that they have as much fun with this as You do flying in DCS ...

So maybe learn to speak on your own behalf and not "judge" what someone might like. So I repeat, there are a lot of people who would be happy if ever a game was created combining a decent simulator of bomber planes, fighter planes, multirole planes, helicopters, ground vehicles from a stupid truck and UAZa0469 / Humvee to tanks and SAMs, and to a infantry soldier. And I am sure that someone who will do such a game one day - will earn at least 3 times as much as on DCS or ARMA.
I will be one of the first to buy this, plus any modules be that be interest me.

 

Nobody tells you to wait 5 hours for a CSAR mission that will fly for you, but why shouldn't others have a great time, because that is what they would like to do? Because you don't feel like it, others can't?

Enabling in DCS to carry out CSAR missions similar to what can be done in ARMA would be something incredibly interesting and playable to play. Of course not for everyone. But for those who think about it for sure.

In the community where I have flown quite intensively and sometimes still fly, successful missions - take off - RTB was / is an important element. If you could link CSAR missions with DCS missions in a way that would make the KIA / MIA / RTB pilot status dependent on their success, it would be great.

Edited October 17, 2021 by Nahen