Future of DCS complex modules, thoughts and opinions

[Northstar98]

5 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Fixed wing sure, but the rotary wing part of the equation has a lot of room for growth left. 2021 was supposed to be "the year of the helicopter", remember?
ED is gaining expertise at the moment when it comes to helo flight dynamics, and it would be a shame to not capitalise on that with further modules.

Also, we all know there's a lot more work to be done when it comes to assets, slingload physics, troop transport, proper MEDEVAC, ... I'd love to see a dedicated helicopter asset pack at some point  

+1 to all of this.

[Silver_Dragon]

7 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Fixed wing sure, but the rotary wing part of the equation has a lot of room for growth left. 2021 was supposed to be "the year of the helicopter", remember?
ED is gaining expertise at the moment when it comes to helo flight dynamics, and it would be a shame to not capitalise on that with further modules.

Also, we all know there's a lot more work to be done when it comes to assets, slingload physics, troop transport, proper MEDEVAC, ... I'd love to see a dedicated helicopter asset pack at some point  

Troop transport and MEDEVAC has a AI and animation team problem... very great problem.

[trois-pas]

1 hour ago, upyr1 said:

There are also a lot of people who know what the aircraft are, and I honestly believe the more fleshed out the earlier eras become the more interest will pick up. 

To overly simplify things, it seems like there's two kind of archetype in the community. On one hand, there's the aviation enthousiast whose motivation is to fly iconic (and realistic) plane. On the  other hand, you have the competitor who is thrilled with pvp whose préférence is on the most effective (and modern aicraft) even at the cost of realism ( a.k.a. guestimate things because of lack of unclassified data source). It's interesting to see in the forum how the two vision confront quite frequently (even if we are all a mix of the two).

I, for one, am more of the first archetype, and, quite pleased to see that after a series of modern module, there's a salvo of cold war jet coming (A7, F8, A6) etc ... Time will tell if Jaguar, Tornado and F111 will join the show.

one point is certain, the more an era is fleshed out (modules, map and ground unit), the more interest it will get. Today, we basically have two era "ready to roll", modern and WW II. hence the focus of the discussion on them. It would be interesting to compare interest on the P-51 module, before and after the current WWII environnement was brought to DCS.

 

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

Some of you forget we have been in this niche business for over 25 years, while others have disappeared. We appreciate your insights and advice but I think we can confidently say we know how to stay in business and work toward future goals, lots of patience is required. 

thanks  

I think most of us are quite confident (and happy)with the way you handle your business. As a customer, some of your decision made me happy (loved the introduction of "old" jets, the WWII era being fleshed out, etc ...) some less. In the end, DCS is a great game as is. Things takes years to complete (I'm ok with that as i literraly take years to learns modules  ). Plenty of things are left to be done but ressource are finite (the only infinite things in DCS is the list of demand of the community) so choice have to be made. The only wish i have is that E.D. remain true to his DNA and continue to focus on realism

On things is sure, if E.D. shut down, we will all be very sorry.

[WobblyFlops]

22 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

The flight model is pretty significant though. It's about half of the module.

Sure, it would take less work to commit to a C model Eagle and deliver it in full fidelity than making a module from scratch, but as I've said, it's a game of resources. Would it be profitable enough to actually do it? Only ED know the answer. In the past, they've addressed that it wouldn't be worth it for the reasons I've outlined and considering that there are many aircraft they could be working on without these limiting factors I can understand the decision. 

 

27 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

There are still hard limitations on what the Strike Eagle can do though, especially with CFT's If you want it from SME's there is material available:

There are more than enough comments on SMEs on the Razbam Discord, like the one I based my previous response on. 

 

29 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

A Mach 1.6 limit is pretty significant for an otherwise Mach 2+ fighter. And yes speed and acceleration is a big part of the Eagle, but so is the agility

Reaching Mach 2.0 or being limited to 1.6 is not a relevant limitation at all. There are limitations on what the Strike Eagle can do kinematically but top speed isn't one of them.  BFM performance sure, that would be relevant. But the issue here isn't deciding whether or not the F-15C would be different enough from the E that would make the experience different enough to offer a different kind of gameplay. The issue is whether or not it would sell enough that it would justify spending the amount of resources necessary to make both of them. 

[upyr1]

On 1/24/2022 at 7:20 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

There's no shortage of aircraft, however the pool of well known aircraft is shrinking fast. If you look at the old flight simulators, the F-15C and the F/A-18E are the only ones remotely likely to appear as DCS modules. Mi-28 (from Apache vs. Havoc) and Su-27 are currently in Russian service, so they're sensitive info, although at one point it was suggested Su-27S wasn't out of reach (in which case they should absolutely do it as a tribute to Flanker, if nothing else). F-117 is a one trick pony that's probably classified to hell and back. F-22 is way, way too advanced and the Commanche, as cool as it would have been, ended up canceled.

This is why I thin Eagle needs to look at cold war aircraft and expanding into land and sea modules. There are some famous cold war aircraft that have yet to be touched, the century series (I'd love to have Bruce Gordon as a SME it would be awesome to have him do the training missions) also we don't have to worry as much about running a fowl  of security laws just documentation. 

Then the naval and land modules. On the naval part I have suggested things running from DCS fleet ops which would be a over view of modern(ish) naval operations as well as older ship classes. Then for land modules we might have things running from combined arms II which would be a massive over haul to full fi tank modules.  The eagle model is built on releasing modules So while somethings need to be fixed in DCS core, it might make more sense to do it as part of model development. For example with ships, a systems based damage model would be wonderful to have with aircraft but it would be essential with a naval module. 

[sorcer3r]

I guess we will see a Superhornet some day

Hopefully a western (modern) utility helo.

 

From my POV as mission builder I would like to see some improvements for dcs AI (air + ground) and also some netcode improvments so that ground war in DCS multiplayeris not just some static target practice

[Furiz]

52 minutes ago, trois-pas said:

To overly simplify things, it seems like there's two kind of archetype in the community. On one hand, there's the aviation enthousiast whose motivation is to fly iconic (and realistic) plane. On the  other hand, you have the competitor who is thrilled with pvp whose préférence is on the most effective (and modern aicraft) even at the cost of realism ( a.k.a. guestimate things because of lack of unclassified data source). It's interesting to see in the forum how the two vision confront quite frequently (even if we are all a mix of the two).

Good guys vs Bad guys?

 

There is people that want realistic modern jets and don't really care for PvP, then there is people that want to PvP with only cold war or warbirds etc... its not just black and white.

[Dragon1-1]

As far as the Eaglejet goes, you guys are forgetting one important matter: it's a two-seater.  It's never going to be the beast that the F-15C is. Now, the Strike Eagle is no slouch in BVR or BFM, that's for sure, but it's just not the C model. OTOH, if the Strike Eagle's GIB is as good as Jester, it'd say it might be an advantage in a furball. Also, if we got the old-ish cockpit, it'd actually be simpler to both make and to fly, due to having less MFDs and less reliance on them. 

The F-15C is already immensely popular, and I don't think they'll disappear from MP when the Mudhen comes out. If anything, I suspect it'd increase the clamor for the single-seat Eaglejet. 

1 hour ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Fixed wing sure, but the rotary wing part of the equation has a lot of room for growth left. 2021 was supposed to be "the year of the helicopter", remember?
ED is gaining expertise at the moment when it comes to helo flight dynamics, and it would be a shame to not capitalise on that with further modules.

Also, we all know there's a lot more work to be done when it comes to assets, slingload physics, troop transport, proper MEDEVAC, ... I'd love to see a dedicated helicopter asset pack at some point  

The thing is, with helos, your options for combat ones are limited. There's the ESSS and ETS pylons for the UH-60, putting it in that category, but otherwise the hall of fame on the rotary side is composed almost entirely of transports. The Phrog, the Chinook, Mi-6, Mi-26, CH-53 and all that are all fine aircraft, but they're pure transports, with weapons limited to door guns. I can see the Lynx as a possible option, it's a speedy helo with options for a few TOWs and rockets, but that's it. ED stated they're not interested in things that can't shoot (door gunners don't count).

Edited January 25, 2022 by Dragon1-1

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

41 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

ED stated they're not interested in things that can't shoot (door gunners don't count).

And I only have very limited interest in helicopters where I am doing more than purely flying. I have no isse with letting the AI handle the pew-pew, but I'd rather not.

The Oil Field campaign for Mi-8 was the most fun I've had in SP DCS.

From my point of view, utility/transport helicopters would tie in very well with the upcoming dynamic campaign, and I hope ED recognises that as well.

[Rudel_chw]

18 hours ago, DaWu said:

the f4 might sell some but not in f16/f15/f18 ranges

 

We will soon see if that's true 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/919-dcs-f-4-phantom/

 

 

Edited January 25, 2022 by Rudel_chw

[MAXsenna]

52 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

We will soon see if that's true 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/919-dcs-f-4-phantom/

 

 

 

Have a feeling you're gonna be correct on that one!  

(Pssst, took a screen grab for later ) 

[Devil 505]

9 hours ago, Exorcet said:

DCS has only touched half of WWII

Oh buddy! ED has not even come close to half of WW2.  It will never cease to amaze people how many aircraft/variants of aircraft were produced during the war.  A very underrated one I really want to see ED do is the P-51B Birdcage model.  Love the look of her.  As others have stated, the P-38 is a must for European and Pacific campaigns and holds a HIGH expectation level from the community, another great bird for ED to tackle.  The P-39 Airacobra would be another fun addition along with maybe a P-61 Black Widow for us night fighters.  We have not even mentioned the fact that we are missing a Hawker Hurricane which in my books is right up there with the Spitfire when it comes to legends and history.  The list goes on and on for WW2.  Africa, Germany, Japan, Russia, Italy.  The list is long but distinguished................

[Devil 505]

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

We will soon see if that's true 

Oh <profanity>! I just got a hard on.

[Eight Ball]

Our dream is to offer the most authentic and realistic simulation of military aircraft, tanks, ground vehicles and ships possible.

I'd like to see them expand the tanks, ground vehicles and ships gameplay and -mostly- leave aircraft/helos modules to third parties.

[upyr1]

1 minute ago, Eight Ball said:

Our dream is to offer the most authentic and realistic simulation of military aircraft, tanks, ground vehicles and ships possible.

I'd like to see them expand the tanks, ground vehicles and ships gameplay and -mostly- leave aircraft/helos modules to third parties.

I don't know what aircraft they have planned right now but I would have no problems if Eagle decided to focus on ground vehicles and ships for a bit. I'd love to see an Iowa module 

[Devil 505]

Something I would love to see is more authentic ground AI units for our modern maps.  With the new troop carrying capabilities coming and the dynamic campaign, we really need some different units.  USMC units, Army units, SOCOM (SEAL, SF, MARSOC).  Our generic troops really take away from the authenticity of the sim itself.  I know ED is working to improve.  I remember technical vehicles were coming along with terrorist I believe.  

If we are to set up real missions, it would be nice to support varying units across the battlefield.  SOCOM insertion/extraction missions, Army/USMC troop deployments, close air support for varying mission tempos.  The list could go on.  We have not even touched on what could be done with the WW2 soldiers.  

I also like the suggestion above for armor units.  I wont go to into depth on this one.  There are multiple forums on it, but the desire is there as well from guys who are familiar with old school Steel Beasts and M1 Abrahams games.  

[Furiz]

3 hours ago, Devil 505 said:

Something I would love to see is more authentic ground AI units for our modern maps.  With the new troop carrying capabilities coming and the dynamic campaign, we really need some different units.  USMC units, Army units, SOCOM (SEAL, SF, MARSOC).  Our generic troops really take away from the authenticity of the sim itself.  I know ED is working to improve.  I remember technical vehicles were coming along with terrorist I believe.  

If we are to set up real missions, it would be nice to support varying units across the battlefield.  SOCOM insertion/extraction missions, Army/USMC troop deployments, close air support for varying mission tempos.  The list could go on.  We have not even touched on what could be done with the WW2 soldiers.  

I also like the suggestion above for armor units.  I wont go to into depth on this one.  There are multiple forums on it, but the desire is there as well from guys who are familiar with old school Steel Beasts and M1 Abrahams games.  

Something is in the works for sure, latest Apache video has some interesting infantry movement when being shot with chain gun at 00:33 in the video.

 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Furiz

[Devil 505]

19 hours ago, Furiz said:

Something is in the works for sure, latest Apache video has some interesting infantry movement when being shot with chain gun at 00:33 in the video.

I noticed this for sure! Looks like improvements on AI movement is in the works.  I know they were working on improving troops.  The only ones I heard that would be an actual addition is insurgents I believe, which I will take in a heart beat.  I am sure more authentic troops will come.  I still am a firm believer this is an untapped industry for a third party dev.  Full fidelity armor module and high fidelity ground units.  If I had the skills, I would take this on in a heart beat.  

[Devil 505]

So I have said this before and I know ED has mentioned it, but I would love to see a first person pilot model in high fidelity for walking to and from your aircraft and possibly briefing rooms.  I know people may say it does not bring much to the game, but I hope the video below demonstrated a little of the immersion it brings to the table.  With the new patch today came a free cam for VR users. 

I set the slow view speed to the "A,S,W,D" keys and the slow up key to the "Q" key.  This allowed me to simulate a first person walk in VR outside the aircraft.  I did a mock walk around of the UH-60 (Mod) and then entered the HELO, started her up, flew to a mock troop pickup, exited the bird, got back in, then landed on a frigate, ending the flight walking inside.  I know people will say the high res textures for surface features are not there yet and I agree, but it shows it can be done.  It is one hell of a site in VR walking up to your aircraft and admiring everything before getting in to start it up.  Did another one in multiplayer where I walked up to a Hind starting up and taking off.  This is just the tip.  Standing in the grass next to the taxi way in multiplayer and watch people buzz the field and each other is like and airshow now in DCS.  Totally worth the experience. 

 

Edited January 29, 2022 by Devil 505

[Callsign112]

8 hours ago, Devil 505 said:

So I have said this before and I know ED has mentioned it, but I would love to see a first person pilot model in high fidelity for walking to and from your aircraft and possibly briefing rooms.  I know people may say it does not bring much to the game, but I hope the video below demonstrated a little of the immersion it brings to the table.  With the new patch today came a free cam for VR users. 

I set the slow view speed to the "A,S,W,D" keys and the slow up key to the "Q" key.  This allowed me to simulate a first person walk in VR outside the aircraft.  I did a mock walk around of the UH-60 (Mod) and then entered the HELO, started her up, flew to a mock troop pickup, exited the bird, got back in, then landed on a frigate, ending the flight walking inside.  I know people will say the high res textures for surface features are not there yet and I agree, but it shows it can be done.  It is one hell of a site in VR walking up to your aircraft and admiring everything before getting in to start it up.  Did another one in multiplayer where I walked up to a Hind starting up and taking off.  This is just the tip.  Standing in the grass next to the taxi way in multiplayer and watch people buzz the field and each other is like and airshow now in DCS.  Totally worth the experience. 

 

 

+1.  Enjoyed the video. As an add-on to what @Furiz pointed out, adding Heatblur's recent announcement to the existing Huey, a Vietnam map would make a lot of sense. But it would make even more sense if we had Ai capable of threatening the real players that occupy those vehicles.

[Devil 505]

1 hour ago, Callsign112 said:

+1.  Enjoyed the video. As an add-on to what @Furiz pointed out, adding Heatblur's recent announcement to the existing Huey, a Vietnam map would make a lot of sense. But it would make even more sense if we had Ai capable of threatening the real players that occupy those vehicles.

Could not agree more! I think the next big Holy S_it moment as far as maps are concerned after Afghanistan will be either Vietnam or Korea.  I could not agree more with better ground AI, but before BIGNEWEY says it, I already no it is planned or already in the works.  Be nice to hear a little more about the progress or status on combined arms in general.  With a stronger emphasis this past year on Helos and the Apache this year, it makes sense to start updating some older AI units on the ground.  

I also noticed last night when walking around the Huey in VR, it could use some major love on the external model as far at the textures go and the engine. When looking in the cockpit, it is still a flat low res image.  I will post a short video here this afternoon with the differences between the Hind and Huey externally.  I walked around the Hind on takeoff last night on the aerobatics server while someone was starting her up and taking off.  It was awesome watching it lift off and fly right over head like I was standing underneath.  That is when I noticed how low the Huey resolution looks up close.  

I would also like to see the Huey get a few upgrades in the future.  Maybe the 40MM grenade launcher or some other additions.  I also hope they improve the door gunner.  The M-60 needs some major love with its textures and especially the sound.  The Huey is still my favorite Helo to fly hands down, just needs to catch up with the standards ED has set with their newer aircraft.  Still lover her though, not complaining, just suggesting.  

[Devil 505]

Here is a video I did last night walking around the Harrier before taking off and practicing air to air refueling.  After bringing her back to the ship, I exited the plane and simulated walking inside the aircraft carrier.  The immersion from start to finish actually getting in and out is pretty satisfying.  I hope this is still in the plans for the super carrier and the briefing room/walking to the aircraft.  

You may have to give the video a little more time as of today to finish processing the higher resolution on YouTube.  It is taking forever.

 

Edited January 29, 2022 by Devil 505

[Devil 505]

This video is enough said.  We need a DCS or Pollychop level MH-6/AH-6.

 

[Mogster]

7 hours ago, Devil 505 said:

This video is enough said.  We need a DCS or Pollychop level MH-6/AH-6.

 

Unfortunately too much is classified I seem to remember.

For DCS from WW2 to now it seems there’s either data but it’s classified so that can’t be used, or no data in existence. Stuffed either way…

Edited January 30, 2022 by Mogster

[Silver_Dragon]

20 hours ago, Devil 505 said:

Here is a video I did last night walking around the Harrier before taking off and practicing air to air refueling.  After bringing her back to the ship, I exited the plane and simulated walking inside the aircraft carrier.  The immersion from start to finish actually getting in and out is pretty satisfying.  I hope this is still in the plans for the super carrier and the briefing room/walking to the aircraft.  

You may have to give the video a little more time as of today to finish processing the higher resolution on YouTube.  It is taking forever.

 

 

The AWSD pilot movement was present from the times of Ka-50 and previously and nothing has changed about them. Has none interaction. When CA was release a similar WASD movement was added to Singer / Sa-18 crew with ability to fire that manpads, but not more was implement, and none habitily to interact with transport vehicles, helos or aircrafts.

Edited January 30, 2022 by Silver_Dragon