Packaging the Phantom

[carss]

Since Heatblur has said they're planning on making various versions of the Phantom and the E model will be a separate module from the Naval Phantoms. I also imagine there would be other versions of the Phantom so I'm guessing there are other versions like maybe the S model, the J etc for Navy and maybe E, F, B etc for Airforce. 

So will the Phantoms be packaged in two different packages like Air Force Phantoms and Navy Phantoms and then consistently updated with new models? Or would there be any other way?

[Cobra847]

For now, the only product we'd like to announce is DCS: F-4E which will include the two aforementioned -E versions of the F-4E.

We're being purposefully vague for now, because while we've conceptualized where we'll be going, the exact details may still change. We don't see huge value in making any variants that would differ only slightly in gameplay/interest if they would require a substantial investment of time and effort, however we certainly would like to balance that vis-a-vis the enjoyment and passion of seeing "your" Phantom come to life. 

It's very safe to assume that an equivalent Navy/USMC Phantom package is a natural part of the roadmap as mentioned previously, of course- but we'll need to certainly prove ourselves to everyone with the -E first!

[carss]

11 hours ago, Cobra847 said:

For now, the only product we'd like to announce is DCS: F-4E which will include the two aforementioned -E versions of the F-4E.

We're being purposefully vague for now, because while we've conceptualized where we'll be going, the exact details may still change. We don't see huge value in making any variants that would differ only slightly in gameplay/interest if they would require a substantial investment of time and effort, however we certainly would like to balance that vis-a-vis the enjoyment and passion of seeing "your" Phantom come to life. 

It's very safe to assume that an equivalent Navy/USMC Phantom package is a natural part of the roadmap as mentioned previously, of course- but we'll need to certainly prove ourselves to everyone with the -E first!

That is certainly admirable and appreciated! Thank you for your transparency!

[Admiral_ZIPANGU]

The choice of F-4E fits Iran in the Persian Gulf map and Israel in the Syrian map that exist in the current DCS. It was not only operated by the United States, the country that developed it, but also by many countries that imported it, hence it is certainly the most anticipated derivative.
If I had to pick one, it would be the RF-4E. An aircraft capable of reconnaissance missions would be a great asset to the DCS.

[The_Chugster]

The British Phantoms would offer a 'different flight experience' due to the Spey engines having very different pros and cons to the J79.

Plus slightly different avionics and weapons like the Skyflash.

[upyr1]

On 1/29/2022 at 5:10 AM, Cobra847 said:

For now, the only product we'd like to announce is DCS: F-4E which will include the two aforementioned -E versions of the F-4E.

We're being purposefully vague for now, because while we've conceptualized where we'll be going, the exact details may still change. We don't see huge value in making any variants that would differ only slightly in gameplay/interest if they would require a substantial investment of time and effort, however we certainly would like to balance that vis-a-vis the enjoyment and passion of seeing "your" Phantom come to life. 

It's very safe to assume that an equivalent Navy/USMC Phantom package is a natural part of the roadmap as mentioned previously, of course- but we'll need to certainly prove ourselves to everyone with the -E first!

I hope that we get enough variants to have a good career highlight reel. Which won't be every block but just enough that we can cover 1960 to the 1980s or later without major gaps.

Also while we understand or at least I understand that a module is a lot of work I know there is going to be some overlap so I was wondering if you saw the user suggested variant pricing model idea where there is a discount based on how much shared code exists between variants. 

I understand that might not be practical but the hope is developers would feel like they have an option between a twofer pack and charging for a full module.

[LanceCriminal86]

Even just on its own, the F-4J covers a lot of territory. Mid-1960s all the way up to the early 80s, applicable not only to all 4 of the Forrestal class but any of the other conventional US carriers, the Enterprise, and even the Nimitz. As interesting as the S would be, it wasn't a major player on the Navy side outside of the Midway. But if Heatblur were to offer another "twofer" it would potentially offer less additional development than the F-4N, which similarly had a short lifespan in frontline Navy use as the S.