When will we see a major update to the games Core mechanics?

[Baldrick33]

10 hours ago, StormBat said:

 Anyway I hope ED realise that just putting out Hi-Res Maps and high fidelity Mods won't be enough to sustain them unless they show significant improvements to the Game core

 

As much as I would wish for all the things stated in this thread I believe new maps and aircraft are exactly what sustains them. The "what helicopter next?" threads will dwarf threads like these for interest, minutes after the release of the Apache into early access with much work to do whilst the Hind is in early access with much to do and so it goes on.

The core projects are huge and it is inevitable a bunch of new content will appear whilst they are worked on. New stuff never comes fast enough in IT, whether that is a combat flight sim or replacing a legacy system to record sales of widgets, it always takes longer then we want!

[Exorcet]

On 4/1/2022 at 2:20 PM, Relayer said:

For a couple of brief examples: inability to get AI wingmen to target specific threats. I know with the A-10 I can say 'hey, attack stuff at my SPI' (which seems inop in any case) but I have no ability to do that in...say, an F/A-18, or F-16. We have tons of data integrated into L16 and seemingly no ability to leverage that into meaningful options for AI control. I want to be able to say 'hey, see that SA-8 I'm looking at? engage that target specifically'. Or 'hey, look at this point of interest and tell me what you see'. The same applies to A2A - the player and AI wingman should have the ability to sort targets in such a way that we can engage a pair of targets and know we're not engaging the same aircraft etc.

 

In addition to real time commands I think we also need more options for mission planning. DCS actually has (or had) such a thing but as with many other features it can be buggy or inconsistent. I'm mostly talking about the wingman F6/F7 command, Engage Mission. It seems like what it's supposed to do is make the AI follow waypoints by itself and perform the tasking at those waypoints. This is honestly great because it allows you to tell them what to do in the mission before hand and saves you from micromanaging them in flight. However the feature only seems to work 25% of the time, with many waypoint actions just being ignored.

Just getting exist functions like this to work would be a big help.

 

[cfrag]

1 hour ago, Baldrick33 said:

As much as I would wish for all the things stated in this thread I believe new maps and aircraft are exactly what sustains them.

Agreed. That rant from Jabbers was remarkable only for the amount of entitled navel-gazing and complete lack of self-awareness. If you are able to play the same game for 6 years, 80 hours a week straight - as he stated he did - then yeah, there will be fatigue. If you expect otherwise, your expectations may be a tad high. It also implies that DCS's core game loop was good for that much time - an incredible amount of time spent (25k hours). In any event, ED does not cater to edge cases like us, they go for the masses with ever-new models and maps. That's their business. My wishes notwithstanding, DCS unfortunately doesn't need a game loop that keeps players engaged much beyond some 200 hrs. Most games are called great if they achieve half of that. Not changing what doesn't urgently need changing unfortunately (for us) is acute business sense, even if it angers the likes of us, who feel left behind, nurse our pet peeves and (I feel rightfully) clamor for fixes to long-standing bugs (after literally decades of waiting). ED know what they are doing. That doesn't mean I'm happy about it, but unlike Jabbers I haven't yet lost my perspective (much). 

Edited April 13, 2022 by cfrag

[Baldrick33]

5 hours ago, cfrag said:

Agreed. That rant from Jabbers was remarkable only for the amount of entitled navel-gazing and complete lack of self-awareness. If you are able to play the same game for 6 years, 80 hours a week straight - as he stated he did - then yeah, there will be fatigue. If you expect otherwise, your expectations may be a tad high. It also implies that DCS's core game loop was good for that much time - an incredible amount of time spent (25k hours). In any event, ED does not cater to edge cases like us, they go for the masses with ever-new models and maps. That's their business. My wishes notwithstanding, DCS unfortunately doesn't need a game loop that keeps players engaged much beyond some 200 hrs. Most games are called great if they achieve half of that. Not changing what doesn't urgently need changing unfortunately (for us) is acute business sense, even if it angers the likes of us, who feel left behind, nurse our pet peeves and (I feel rightfully) clamor for fixes to long-standing bugs (after literally decades of waiting). ED know what they are doing. That doesn't mean I'm happy about it, but unlike Jabbers I haven't yet lost my perspective (much). 

 

In the gaming world we are all edge cases, some are just a bit edgier!

[MAXsenna]

Maybe you need to try other games, for example American Truck Simulator is very relaxing and has a long list of Steam accomplishments to fulfill. 

Achievements in DCS would be awesome!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Rudel_chw]

21 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Achievements in DCS would be awesome!

 

Indeed, its one of the great features of Steam, gives a sense of completion once you master a game:

 

but I doubt that ED will ever implement that, as it would make a strong case for moving from stand-alone onto Steam, where there is less profit for ED.

Edited April 15, 2022 by Rudel_chw

[okopanja]

51 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

Indeed, its one of the great features of Steam, gives a sense of completion once you master a game:

 

but I doubt that ED will ever implement that, as it would make a strong case for moving from stand-alone onto Steam, where there is less profit for ED.

 

Kill 100 F-14B with a single ET?

Maybe this would make people less stick with a single aircraft they are comfortable with?

[MAXsenna]

 
Indeed, its one of the great features of Steam, gives a sense of completion once you master a game:

 
but I doubt that ED will ever implement that, as it would make a strong case for moving from stand-alone onto Steam, where there is less profit for ED.

Sure, but ED could absolutely implement an in game achievement system, though I'd like core updates way before ED even thinks about it.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[cfrag]

13 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

Sure, but ED could absolutely implement an in game achievement system

They already have one. You see it when DCS starts up, at the bottom. The grey ones mean that you still need that achievement  

 

[MAXsenna]

They already have one. You see it when DCS starts up, at the bottom. The grey ones mean that you still need that achievement  


 

OMG! How could I possibly miss THAT?
Must be that I have achieved them all.
Well ED, bring out new ones, and keep'em coming!!!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Callsign112]

On 4/15/2022 at 3:06 PM, MAXsenna said:

Achievements in DCS would be awesome!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

We already have an achievement system in the Stand-alone game. It might not be as regimented as a game where you unlock features through achievements, but there is still an achievement system.

[Boosterdog]

On 4/16/2022 at 11:19 AM, cfrag said:

They already have one. You see it when DCS starts up, at the bottom. The grey ones mean that you still need that achievement  

 

Get them all and you get a Win the "Blind Faith" trophy. 

[Callsign112]

And what do you get if you buy some of the modules more than once? Cuz apparently that's a thing.

[MAXsenna]

And what do you get if you buy some of the modules more than once? Cuz apparently that's a thing.

Well, you don't get double "achievements", that's for sure.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Callsign112]

No probably not. I don't know about you @MAXsenna, but I'm at least getting double the fun.

Buying something being sold in two different packages isn't half as bad as buying the MiG 21 when you don't even own a joystick! But I wouldn't give it back even if they offered me a refund because it is such a beautiful module and I will eventually get to learning it. The question is when, because my list of modules to learn is getting long and set to grow apparently. But in the end, I think its what actually attracts me to DCS the most. It really is a learning SIM.  

[Dragon1-1]

What I'd like to see, besides AI improvements and so on, is improved mission presentation. Briefings are OK, but we can't write custom debriefings, and the end campaign message (and music) is always the same. If it was possible to customize them, that alone would be a massive boon for singleplayer mission makers. Currently, singleplayer is clunky and rather limited, even disregarding AI issues.

[MAXsenna]

No probably not. I don't know about you @MAXsenna, but I'm at least getting double the fun.
Buying something being sold in two different packages isn't half as bad as buying the MiG 21 when you don't even own a joystick! But I wouldn't give it back even if they offered me a refund because it is such a beautiful module and I will eventually get to learning it. The question is when, because my list of modules to learn is getting long and set to grow apparently. But in the end, I think its what actually attracts me to DCS the most. It really is a learning SIM.  

Oh, that's true!
Got tired of how the FC3 is packed together, so I got them individually as well, so yes, I'm definitely having more fun now!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Callsign112]

8 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Oh, that's true!
Got tired of how the FC3 is packed together, so I got them individually as well, so yes, I'm definitely having more fun now!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

I more than likely would have done the same thing as you had it not been for someone giving me the heads up on the how it works before buying the FC3. The FC3 package is a really good value proposition, but after looking more closely at the situation, I prefer to buy the individual modules even if I decide later on to get them all and have to spend a few dollars more.

[FlankerKiller]

On 2/20/2022 at 10:32 AM, BIGNEWY said:

Try and enjoy what we already have, it will make it more enjoyable for you. We have lots of features and improvements to come, but they will take time, if you are not the patient type it will be harder for you. 

I've been playing this game since 2005. It has the same ATC, the same basic ground and naval Ai behavior, the same basic SAM behavior, the same basic commands for the Ai wingmen. The exception to that last one is the A-10C it's wingman commands are pretty freaking awesome. And honestly vary vary similar wether. I mean I'm patient, but it's been a vary long time. 

[Callsign112]

3 hours ago, FlankerKiller said:

I've been playing this game since 2005. It has the same ATC, the same basic ground and naval Ai behavior, the same basic SAM behavior, the same basic commands for the Ai wingmen. The exception to that last one is the A-10C it's wingman commands are pretty freaking awesome. And honestly vary vary similar wether. I mean I'm patient, but it's been a vary long time. 

I don't think anyone could blame someone else for feeling the frustration that gets stacked on top of waiting with what might seem like no light at the end of the tunnel. And I don't have near the experience you do here, but I have to say that I have seen a number of improvements since arriving in 2019.

The way I see things at the moment is they are trying to tackle some real big ticket items. Big ticket probably doesn't really do a good job at conveying the actual gravity of the situation, but I think you get my point. Based on what little information they were willing to share, my guess is they will conclude on implementing the technologies to support VR/advanced graphics by late 2022, early 2023. My hope is once that is done, we will start seeing improvements in the cycle time needed for other developments.

Edited April 19, 2022 by Callsign112

[Rudel_chw]

33 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

I've been playing this game since 2005. It has the same ATC, the same basic ground and naval Ai behavior, the same basic SAM behavior, the same basic commands for the Ai wingmen.

 

Well, you have picked just aspects that have not changed ... I can pick aspects that actually have changed: On 2005 we didn't had clickable cockpits, we didn't had headtracking support (it appeared on 2010 with flaming cliffs 2), nor did we had VR support (it appeared on 2016), the graphics were just awful, and not comparable, as the screenshots below show.

 

The thing is, DCS is an evolutionary product, that advances bit by bit .. what you want is a completely new and re-done from scratch product.

 

[Hiob]

That's what I'm always saying - even the Caucasus looks pretty darn good by now. Not to mention Syria or Marianas.......

Those Vintage screens really put things in perspective.

 

I have to second one aspect of necessary improvement though. The overall "Enemy"-AI would really be an important upgrade. I mean that is a huge part of the "Combat Simulator" part of DCS, isn't it? Especially needed for SP.

I agree though, that changes and progression will come evolutionary as they did in the past.

Edited April 19, 2022 by Hiob

[Exorcet]

14 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

Well, you have picked just aspects that have not changed ... I can pick aspects that actually have changed: On 2005 we didn't had clickable cockpits, we didn't had headtracking support (it appeared on 2010 with flaming cliffs 2), nor did we had VR support (it appeared on 2016)

 

 

 

Not to mention PFM being the standard flight model now, and AFM for weapons. Also compare the mission editor to its original state. So many features have been added, especially for triggers. Truly massive changes. DCS today is a totally different product than it's predecessors. It's just such a large project that there is always more to do.

[BIGNEWY]

1 hour ago, FlankerKiller said:

I've been playing this game since 2005. It has the same ATC, the same basic ground and naval Ai behavior, the same basic SAM behavior, the same basic commands for the Ai wingmen. The exception to that last one is the A-10C it's wingman commands are pretty freaking awesome. And honestly vary vary similar wether. I mean I'm patient, but it's been a vary long time. 

As mentioned, try to enjoy what we have, and what we are improving at the moment, there is no magic button to improve everything at once, it all takes time. 

[FlankerKiller]

On 2/24/2022 at 10:33 AM, Callsign112 said:

 

I am fairly new here, but after following a number of relevant threads, it is easy to understand all the frustration that has built up from long periods of waiting for things to be fixed.

The benefit for me I suppose is that reading all these threads has caused me to step back and ask why would anyone, let alone a company, want to create such frustration?

All of this has made me wonder if part of the problem ED initially faced was not having a large enough inventory of flyable modules that would allow them to sustain operations while they go back and address bug fixes and other issues? And adding to that problem as things progressed is the obvious elephant in the room, a growing expectation on the SIM to generate a more immersive environment (i.e. VR).

I know this take on things can't explain everything, but my hope is that the current inventory of flyable modules/tech packs/maps is sufficient, and after the incoming major core updates (Vulkan/multi-thread) are in place to better support things like VR, we will start to see more updates/bug fixes to previously released modules/maps/tech packs.

Fingers crossed

 

This is absolutely it. Before 2017 DCS was a mess of a sandbox. The modules were all over the place in time. It was kinda hard to really fly a good immersive campaign. It was mostly ground attack aircraft, and trainers. Or obsolete jets with not much in the way of proper ground units for them. That was definitely the biggest complaint. Then in 2018 there was a burst of new modules. 2018-2019 saw the release of: the F-18, the Gazelle, the F-16, the F-14, the JF-17, the Spitfire, and the FW-190A. I'm sure I'm missing a few but this list is what really jumps out. In 2019 the F-18 really started getting capabilities. And of corse the Jeff could do it all out of the box. In DCS time the whole landscape changed seemingly overnight. Every conceivable tactical mission could be flown and by multiple modules. But then some of us long timers started noticing issues with the base game itself. Now to be fare there has been some definite improvements. I particularly like the sun and moon indicator in the mission editor. And 2018 wasn't all that long ago in DCS time. So maybe more is coming. 

Now the core complaint of the early years of DCS has been solved. Instead of a far  flung sandbox of unrelated modules from unrepresented times, we have a pretty damn good representation of air combat in the early to mid 2000's. But now the main complaint is changing. The core of the game has lagged behind the new modules that have been developed. The ground Ai dose basically the same things it did in 2009. The ATC is exactly the same as 2009, the weather isn't drastically different then it was in 2009, and ships still act like they did in 2009. Maybe there will be a shift in priorities now. But I need to see results before I'm convinced.

An issue  I'm going  to predict now is that more modules aren't needed. While there are modules in the pipeline that I'm almost certainly going to buy, I don't really need them to indulge my hobby. I mostly fly the Hornet, although lately I'm getting into the Viper. With the combo of the Viper, A-10, and Ah-64 I can play any mission I can conceive of. And honestly with the complexity of these modules it's hard to really master multiple airframes. Probably why IRL pilots only fly one jet at a time. I am certain that my purchasing of new modules will slow down now. But what I as a player want is a better game to fly those "new" modules in. It has been pointed out to me that this makes me irrelevant in this market. If that is true that is truly sad. 

To that end this is what I as a long time player feel need to improve. 

Aircraft Ai behavior. They should fight  like an aircraft would fight. Not just in BFM, but throughout the entire engagement. Also there needs to be better/more diversity in the Ai skills levels.

Better Air traffic control, and air base operations. The ATC should  be able to tell you what king of approach you will fly, what your holding pattern altitude should be, when to approach and when to hold in heavy traffic. It should be able to support multiple runways. It should be able to support at least straight in approaches, and overhead break approaches. Also there are lots of new airfields and a progressive taxi would be a godsend. 

Better ground Ai. Not just pathfinding, but actual combat behavior. Moving a limited distance to engage or withdraw. Stopping when faced with overwhelming resistance. Being able to attach to infantry and actually stay in formation with then and support them. Being able to withdraw when faced with overwhelming resistance. 

Better naval Ai, and over all implantation.  The ability to maneuver to attack a target  The addition and use of countermeasures. The ability to maneuver to place the most or the working defensive weapons toward the threat. The radar to be a separate and destroyble part of the ship. Like deck guns. 

Better  whether. The new clouds to be implemented in dynamic weather, a humidity model. Honestly that is all on that front. I would like to see the airflow move over things like mountains, and be disturbed by buildings and the like. But I'm pretty sure my prosser would melt if that were to be implemented. 

Most importantly DCS needs to be able to take advantage of multiple cores. I have not one clue is that is even possible. 

So that is my ramble, and the core improvements that I would love to see in DCS. Hopefully there will be progress. I've been here sins 2009, I hope to be here in 2035. There is much promised. We will see.