Do a DCS tank

[VTJS17_Fire]

Ok,

we already have multi-crew, we have datalink for years, we have high detailed ground objects, collision modell for trees and ED optimized their development process for new products to that time, 10 years ago.

So please, do a full fidelity DCS tank. If think it's unimportant, wether it is an Abrams, a Leopard or any other tank. You have all the tools to do it and I would wonder, if there's not enough information about any of the modern tanks. Or a Shilka.

[Hammer1-1]

That would be......INTERESTING... but think they really need to rework the entire world at ground level for that to work. Not sure if youve spent much time at ground level, but it aint pretty...and some of its a lot of wishful thinking especially when tanks and stuff float over rivers without bridges sometimes.  Will admit though, I absolutely love this idea.

Edited March 6, 2022 by Hammer1-1

[Evoman]

ED has already confirmed that high fidelity ground vehicles are definitely coming to DCS in the future.  For more details see this interview at 47:45 min.

 

 

[VTJS17_Fire]

I bought Combined Arms at day one and yes, there are flaws but I fly DCS/Lock On since 2007 and there where bugs for the aircraft all the years. We waited all that time, to get these awesome clouds last year but the way was the same: ED startet with the airplanes (and helicopters), not with the perfect enviroment for these assets.

[cfrag]

8 hours ago, VTJS17_Fire said:

I bought Combined Arms at day one and yes, there are flaws

Perhaps. In May it's been 10 years since release, and a Leo II still gets stopped dead in its tracks by a two inch thin birch tree and it still can race downhill at 270 km/h, outpacing terminal velocity. Those aren't flaws, they are show-stops - in a shipping product. There has been no tangible progress for a decade. While I agree that a well-made single-module Tank or Ship (heck, even train) is interesting (I'd buy anything from ED), they really have their work cut out (and that means immense work: re-writing the physics engine for land vehicles isn't trivial - as it's all too obvious when we look at vehicles now. Don't get me started on ships). Since this is a wish-list, yeah, I too wish for it. But please not in a CA-level 'quality'. Heck, even the Hawk (which I own) had better physics, and ED did the right thing and pulled that one. 

 

[jackmckay]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXl3-l3VJoo

[Callsign112]

12 hours ago, VTJS17_Fire said:

Ok,

we already have multi-crew, we have datalink for years, we have high detailed ground objects, collision modell for trees and ED optimized their development process for new products to that time, 10 years ago.

So please, do a full fidelity DCS tank. If think it's unimportant, wether it is an Abrams, a Leopard or any other tank. You have all the tools to do it and I would wonder, if there's not enough information about any of the modern tanks. Or a Shilka.

Thank you!

[Callsign112]

2 hours ago, cfrag said:

Perhaps. In May it's been 10 years since release, and a Leo II still gets stopped dead in its tracks by a two inch thin birch tree and it still can race downhill at 270 km/h, outpacing terminal velocity. Those aren't flaws, they are show-stops - in a shipping product. There has been no tangible progress for a decade. While I agree that a well-made single-module Tank or Ship (heck, even train) is interesting (I'd buy anything from ED), they really have their work cut out (and that means immense work: re-writing the physics engine for land vehicles isn't trivial - as it's all too obvious when we look at vehicles now. Don't get me started on ships). Since this is a wish-list, yeah, I too wish for it. But please not in a CA-level 'quality'. Heck, even the Hawk (which I own) had better physics, and ED did the right thing and pulled that one. 

 

I completely get everything you said.

Maybe its because I haven't been here long enough, but thought the WWII assets pack had some improved vehicle model additions in the last couple of years? And it seems to me that some of the graphic/sound effects have also seen improvements, as well as some path-finding issues and the ability to drive up a hill. We also got leopard variants and a whole slew of other ground vehicles. One of the touches that I really like is the sound of the Leopard and Abrams tanks. I think they captured it really well. My hope is that we at least start to see more frequent updates/fixes/additions to ground units/Ai infantry.

I know your point was more about the actual physics model which is the most important part, and your right, a complete overhaul would be no small task, but making bite sized improvements would be better than no improvement at all. 

Edited March 6, 2022 by Callsign112

[jackmckay]

this is what i would like to see in DCS +internal environment

 

Edited March 6, 2022 by jackmckay

[cfrag]

2 hours ago, Callsign112 said:

I know your point was more about the actual physics model which is the most important part

So, besides that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you like the play?  

[Poncho_Longshanks]

I keep saying it, Eagle Dynamics and Bohemia Interactive need to get together and have a love child... This would be excellent. Also horrifying in many ways. But mostly beautiful. /Rant

[Callsign112]

On 3/6/2022 at 9:57 AM, jackmckay said:

this is what i would like to see in DCS +internal environment

 

 

I don't know how big the team is at ED, but I really think they need to consider expanding it if the hope is that we would ever see something like this in the near future. But yeah sign me up!

[Hawkeye60]

 

[upyr1]

4 hours ago, Poncho_Longshanks said:

I keep saying it, Eagle Dynamics and Bohemia Interactive need to get together and have a love child... This would be excellent. Also horrifying in many ways. But mostly beautiful. /Rant

I'd love that team up.   

On the subject of tank modules, I would like to have some multi vehicle packs.