Optional Refueling Assist

[SharpeXB]

41 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I said "accessibility", not "training aid". Please don't move the goalpost.  

Well clearly ED sees a distinction between these other aids and Easy AAR which is a reason they’re not doing it. Is “accessibility” a crutch or a way to help players into the more complex aspects of the sim? I’d say the latter. If someone just isn’t interested in complexity why play DCS? There are other games more suited to simplistic gameplay. 
 

Here’s a hint

“The ambition is to hand hold users from novice pilot all the way to the most advanced and sophisticated operator of such complex weapons systems”

That phrase implies progress and learning. 

Edited October 7, 2022 by SharpeXB

[cfrag]

40 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Well clearly ED sees a distinction between these other aids and Easy AAR which is a reason they’re not doing it.

No, I think that you make an artificial distinction to fit your narrative and then attribute it to ED. You don't like it, that's fine.  

[shagrat]

vor 18 Minuten schrieb cfrag:

No, I think that you make an artificial distinction to fit your narrative and then attribute it to ED. You don't like it, that's fine.  

He always "knows" what ED is thinking, what their business model is, their plans, everything. He is the omniscient mastermind behind DCS... at least he posts like he is.

[SharpeXB]

46 minutes ago, cfrag said:

No, I think that you make an artificial distinction to fit your narrative and then attribute it to ED. You don't like it, that's fine.  

Well they clearly have a reason for their decisions. Everyone is free to speculate. 

25 minutes ago, shagrat said:

He always "knows" what ED is thinking, what their business model is, their plans, everything. He is the omniscient mastermind behind DCS... at least he posts like he is.

Just like everyone else here

[cfrag]

Just now, SharpeXB said:

Everyone is free to speculate. 

Indeed. I recommend that in those cases you perhaps add phrases like "I believe", "my guess is", "perhaps", "maybe", or "I conjecture" rather than just asserting "X does Y because Z".  

[SharpeXB]

45 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Indeed. I recommend that in those cases you perhaps add phrases like "I believe", "my guess is", "perhaps", "maybe", or "I conjecture" rather than just asserting "X does Y because Z".  

I should think that’s obvious…

[cfrag]

  

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

If someone just isn’t interested in complexity why play DCS?

You seem to confuse complexity with sophistication. Complexity in DCS is not the goal, it's a result from some rather unfortunate design decisions made by those who built the original aircraft (the one that is simulated), or that resulted from the technical limitations at that time. Simply unthinkingly replicating this into a game would be bad game engineering and a disservice to your customers. Good game design is allowing optionally to make something less complex by taking advantage of new technology. That makes the game that much better, that much more accessible, that much more successful. Complexity is not a measure of quality; from an engineering point it's a measure of failure - because complexity kills.

I remember when (in early 2000?) I switched from radio nav to GPS by adding one of the first "affordable" portable GPS receivers to my flight bag. It was simply astonishing: instant location, diverts at a key press, warning of airspaces ahead, with all freqs available, all in real-time. Sure beats chasing radials and locating by dead reckoning on a kneeboard and flipping through my Jepps. Complexity in a cockpit is something to avoid, so you try to reduce it. Needless complexity is just a silly thought to any pilot; anything that makes things easier also makes it safer. I surely did not feel that I was "cheating" when I used my new Garmin to locate me rather than trying to get a fix from some VORs. It allowed me to better enjoy the flight.

In games, I prefer when I can set complexity on a sliding scale. Some days I want a challenge, on others I want to simply enjoy. DCS offers some of that, yet is somewhat behind the curve in that respect (for example, I'd have welcomed if we were able to get progressives on larger airfields (especially Syria). Other things like the suggested AAR helper, or the already implemented invulnerability, easy coms, etc. make DCS a better, more rounded product. 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

There are other games more suited to simplistic gameplay

I believe that your near-palpable disdain for, and quite unjustified feeling of superiority over, people who play DCS different from the way you do is badly misplaced. If people choose to dial down the complexity of a task to have more fun with another aspect, they simply play different from you. If you judge others by how they have fun, the problem is on your side, not theirs. It's not that people can't handle complexity, like you seem to think, or that they are lesser players that you -  rest assured that they can handle it. They simply enjoy a different aspect of DCS from you. 

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, cfrag said:

You seem to confuse complexity with sophistication.

When I say “complexity” I mean the full fidelity modeling in DCS compared to more simple games. 

1 hour ago, cfrag said:

I believe that your near-palpable disdain for, and quite unjustified feeling of superiority over, people who play DCS different from the way you do is badly misplaced.

I don’t intend disdain, my question is just rhetorical. Why pay $79 for a full fidelity aircraft module if you aren’t going to use all of what it has to offer? There are indeed other games better suited to more simple gameplay. I’m not saying that this is wrong or bad. It’s just a choice. For example I actually don’t like sim shooter games, to me they’re kinda dull and I prefer the arcade style fps games. So that’s what I play. I don’t look to make one into the other or buy ARMA expecting it to be like Battlefield V

Edited October 7, 2022 by SharpeXB

[shagrat]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb cfrag:

  

You seem to confuse complexity with sophistication. Complexity in DCS is not the goal, it's a result from some rather unfortunate design decisions made by those who built the original aircraft (the one that is simulated), or that resulted from the technical limitations at that time. Simply unthinkingly replicating this into a game would be bad game engineering and a disservice to your customers. Good game design is allowing optionally to make something less complex by taking advantage of new technology. That makes the game that much better, that much more accessible, that much more successful. Complexity is not a measure of quality; from an engineering point it's a measure of failure - because complexity kills.

I remember when (in early 2000?) I switched from radio nav to GPS by adding one of the first "affordable" portable GPS receivers to my flight bag. It was simply astonishing: instant location, diverts at a key press, warning of airspaces ahead, with all freqs available, all in real-time. Sure beats chasing radials and locating by dead reckoning on a kneeboard and flipping through my Jepps. Complexity in a cockpit is something to avoid, so you try to reduce it. Needless complexity is just a silly thought to any pilot; anything that makes things easier also makes it safer. I surely did not feel that I was "cheating" when I used my new Garmin to locate me rather than trying to get a fix from some VORs. It allowed me to better enjoy the flight.

In games, I prefer when I can set complexity on a sliding scale. Some days I want a challenge, on others I want to simply enjoy. DCS offers some of that, yet is somewhat behind the curve in that respect (for example, I'd have welcomed if we were able to get progressives on larger airfields (especially Syria). Other things like the suggested AAR helper, or the already implemented invulnerability, easy coms, etc. make DCS a better, more rounded product. 

I believe that your near-palpable disdain for, and quite unjustified feeling of superiority over, people who play DCS different from the way you do is badly misplaced. If people choose to dial down the complexity of a task to have more fun with another aspect, they simply play different from you. If you judge others by how they have fun, the problem is on your side, not theirs. It's not that people can't handle complexity, like you seem to think, or that they are lesser players that you -  rest assured that they can handle it. They simply enjoy a different aspect of DCS from you. 

Very eloquent and good explanation.

The interesting thing is, this is a wishlist thread, basically a place to ask for new features.

Why certain people feel the need to suppress everything they personally don't like, with bogus "arguments" is beyond my understanding.

I really hope the overhaul of the AAR system as a whole, will see some closer looks at the ideas and input from these requests.

[JCTherik]

So, after seeing that this thread is still going after 2 weeks, let me add my 2 cents.

 

Over all, in this form, a hard no.

 

After reading all the "how"s "when"s and "where"s, nobody actually answered the "why".

DCS is not a game with a story or progression, it's basically just a sandbox, so the only reward a player gets is learning to get better at things. Some of those skills give obvious advantages, others don't.

 

Let me list several hard skills, or "bosses" in this game:

- using technical systems, like cold start, navigation instruments, radar operations, etc

- understanding technical systems, their shortcomings, failure modes, etc

- runway landing

- carrier landing

- formation flying

- AA refueling.

 

Some of those skills give a clear advantage to the player. Learning to use steerpoints or tacan is much more convenient than constantly jumping to F10 map. Understanding the failure modes of aircraft systems allows one to limp home in a damaged bird.

Landing on runways allows one to refuel and rearm instead of eject and respawn, landing on a carrier does the same, but usually closer to the action.

Formation flying gives no benefit, apart from possibly confusing the enemy radar, but it's a hard prerequisite for AA refueling.

AA refueling gives a player the option to trade 5 minutes of their life and a sweat soaked t-shirt for a full tank of fuel.

 

Out of those, the AA refueling is by far the hardest, much harder than formation flying, and yet the benefit the player gets from learning that skill aren't really that big.

I can air refuel well in a tomcat, but I still fail at refueling from time to time, particularly when someone's talking to me on voice chat, or when I'm deep into bingo and get nervous.

I am really struggling to refuel f16.

 

Implementing a button that allows people to refuel effortlessly would give them an advantage over players that do it manually, it would negate any achievement associated with it, and ultimately, it would remove the final "boss" from this game.

 

Howbout we instead implement a big red button that says "WIN DCS" and when you click it, you win DCS? /s

 

It's not like AAR is needed for anything, it's quite rare that AAR would require less fuel than gliding onto the nearest runway, the main benefit for AAR is that one can take off at quarter tank and then get a full tank at 30k feet.

I really struggle to see how making AAR automatic by pressing a button would help anybody. Having only the "hit box" bigger would make no difference, since if you can't connect, you definitely can't stay in.

 

I understand that AAR can be real pain on certain hardware, like sticks with huge deadzones or low precision, or a keyboard.

 

Howbout instead of giving people "WIN AAR FREE" button, we get an aid that would equalize good sticks, bad sticks, keyboards and screens?

 

Having a toggle button that would temporarily apply massive curves and saturation, to stick and throttle would make refueling similarly difficult on less precise sticks and throttles.

Having a toggle button that would change the hue of other airplanes to red or blue based on if they're coming closer or moving away - ala doppler view - would allow people to see changing distances, which would put a flat screen on par with VR. Or, having some on-screen indicator of distance would do the same.

 

I would have no issues with those, but this is not what we're talking about, we're talking about a "easy AAR button", and I think that's going against of what DCS is.

 

Have you tried popping into aerobatics servers and fly formations first?

Edited October 12, 2022 by JCTherik

[SharpeXB]

Something DCS could do to help players learn to AAR and be realistic at the same time would be to simply have more missions where the player isn’t always #1. Practice at flying formation in the game. Perhaps when there’s a dynamic campaign or career mode that will be part of it. In another sim with a career mode I personally spent hours of gameplay time keeping formation and it improved my flying immensely. Go figure I had an easier time learning AAR in DCS. I notice in this game that there is rarely a time during normal gameplay when you fly as a wingman, you’re always in the lead. 
When I learned to AAR I did it as a part of the Maple Flag A-10C course where you have to pass a lot of other tests like formation flying before proceeding to AAR. Not only is this a difficult skill but it seems many players try to run before they can walk. Even a formation flying instant action mission would be a good thing to include with the game. 

Edited October 12, 2022 by SharpeXB

[Exorcet]

2 hours ago, JCTherik said:

So, after seeing that this thread is still going after 2 weeks, let me add my 2 cents.

 

Over all, in this form, a hard no.

 

After reading all the "how"s "when"s and "where"s, nobody actually answered the "why".

Why has been covered from the beginning. People have different abilities and interests. As you point out, AAR is not necessary in DCS, therefore there is no reason to learn it for the player who isn't interested.

DCS is an entertainment product. That's pretty much all the why you'll ever need.

[Tank50us]

7 hours ago, JCTherik said:

Implementing a button that allows people to refuel effortlessly would give them an advantage over players that do it manually, it would negate any achievement associated with it, and ultimately, it would remove the final "boss" from this game.

Actually, if you read my post, you'd note that the only purpose of this assist, is to *keep* you hooked up and taking fuel. Getting hooked up is still all done manually by the player using the feature (if they so choose). So in those unlikely cases where the dog really needs to go out, or Amazon picks an odd time to deliver something, or any number of reasons you may have to suddenly jump up from the game, you have something available to keep you alive and tanking while you take care of the real world things (outside SP ofc, where you can just pause).

This also helps those who have actual physical issues staying hooked up. From not having the right hardware, to not having hardware that works 100%, to having actual physical disabilities that might hurt your ability to perform such a task, this would be a valuable tool so those people can still enjoy the game with the rest of us. And given all the other assists that exist already, most of which are client-side anyway, how would this be any different?

Finally... and I can't believe this actually has to be said... How exactly does this give an unfair advantage? Last time I checked, whether you can refuel or not becomes irrelevant if you're on a PvP Conflict server, and the other team keeps taking out your sides tankers. At that point, no one's getting gas. And on PvE servers... I still don't see how this would give an unfair advantage... after all.. it's PvE, and having the ability to refuel just means you can fly further with more bang, and having something to help you stay hooked up to the tanker just means more people get to do that... something that I'd think would be quite valuable on maps such as South Atlantic where the players could start on the Falklands Island, and have to travel to the mainland to hit targets and fly back.

As for the skill issue... not everyone clings to the assists. At some point, people learn how to start their plane for example, and then they kick that training wheel off. The same holds true for all the other assists. At one point, a player will kick the training wheel, and they're able to do that task without it. What's one more that is completely optional, and likely turned off by default?

[MadKreator]

On 10/7/2022 at 7:18 AM, SharpeXB said:

The funny thing is I’ll bet lots of people who haven’t learned to AAR still have hundreds of hours in this game. They just choose to spend those hours doing something else. That’s fine but recognize that this is a choice, not an obstacle. If anyone wants to put the effort towards this they can do it. It only seems impossible until you get it. 

That’s me! Lol sitting close to 600 hours in dcs and I’ve never attempted AAR. Why? Because I don’t really want to. I don’t have the time/ or attention span to fly long enough missions to need it. Maybe someday when I run out of things to learn, practice or blow up

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, Tank50us said:

So in those unlikely cases where the dog really needs to go out, or Amazon picks an odd time to deliver something, or any number of reasons you may have to suddenly jump up from the game, you have something available to keep you alive and tanking while you take care of the real world things (outside SP ofc, where you can just pause).

This doesn’t make sense because afaik all the AAR capable aircraft have autopilots. Why not just use that? Also you’d have to take the time to navigate and fly to the tanker which doesn’t make this idea a very good pause substitute. 

2 hours ago, Tank50us said:

How exactly does this give an unfair advantage?

By essentially giving that player easy access to unlimited fuel. And it’s a skill filter. In a competitive server pretty much every skill or game aid should have a mission setting for on or off. Look how even Easy Comms is a setting. Why? Because it’s a skill. 

Edited October 12, 2022 by SharpeXB

[Tank50us]

13 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

By essentially giving that player easy access to unlimited fuel. And it’s a skill filter. In a competitive server pretty much every skill or game aid should have a mission setting for on or off. Look how even Easy Comms is a setting.

And clearly you missed the entire point of my statement... you first have to get hooked up to the tanker, which itself isn't an easy endeavor. And if you're on a competitive PvP server... how does it give *anyone* an advantage, when the tankers are #2 on the airborne targets list (#1 being the other teams AWACS). If the tankers are a non factor (because they keep getting shot down), explain to me how *that* team is going to have an advantage if even some of their players are using that one feature... which is optional to begin with. Also, you keep using the argument that "They'll have unlimited fuel" as if the hose will stay connected to them hundreds of miles from the tanker, which of course, if you read my proposal, the moment you get "Transfer Complete", or move the controls, the function turns off automatically, which means if you're not back at the stick when that last drop enters your tank, you'll be flying off into the ether when the tanker turns.

19 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

This doesn’t make sense because afaik all the AAR capable aircraft have autopilots. Why not just use that? Also you’d have to take the time to navigate and fly to the tanker which doesn’t make this idea a very good pause substitute. 

Because autopilot doesn't do any of this. Even in real life flying the boom or basket is an all-manual affair, and even drones can't do it on their own even if they have AAR capability. The point of this is to take advantage of the games own mechanics and let the AI take over while you're hooked up. And in before you bring up my use of real world examples.... remember that these pilots train for weeks or months before they actually hook up to a tanker for the first time. On top of that, they have much better depth perception (only VR players get this in DCS), and they can feel what the plane is actually doing. More over, you also have the tanker talking to the pilots to guide them in (something I think DCS also needs FYI). Hell, I'd even take a visual representation of the line-up lights on the belly of the 135 akin to what we have for the Meatball for the SCM. Anything would be better than the "nothing" we have now.

[SharpeXB]

7 minutes ago, Tank50us said:

Because autopilot doesn't do any of this.

You suggested using your “stay connected helper” idea as a sort of aerial parking spot where you can “pause” your flight. That’s what I’m referring to. Again an autopilot will do exactly this so that idea doesn’t make sense. 

10 minutes ago, Tank50us said:

And if you're on a competitive PvP server... how does it give *anyone* an advantage

Because it helps them refuel and competitive servers may want all the helpers switched off. 

[JCTherik]

On 10/13/2022 at 12:45 AM, Tank50us said:

how does it give *anyone* an advantage, when the tankers are #2 on the airborne targets list

So, why do you need AAR assist if your tankers are dead?

 

On 10/13/2022 at 12:45 AM, Tank50us said:

The point of this is to take advantage of the games own mechanics and let the AI take over while you're hooked up.

The point is to make it realistic as much as possible.

A button that will change your curves and give you some substitute for depth perception, or getting the 135 lights on screen, I have absolutely no problem with that. Although, I'd prefer the game just fixed the lighting and rendering issues so that we can see the real lights better instead.

A button that refuels for you, even if you do still need to connect yourself, I don't think that should be a thing.

 

If you hop into aerobatics servers, you can be learning flying formations today AND having fun in the process, you don't have to struggle with attempting AAR. If you can't get the thing in the thing and keep it there, don't push it, don't try it, go fly more formations and tighter formations. It's really not that hard, the tools for learning and progressing are there, you just want it for free.

 

I fly almost exclusively aerobatics and the main measurement for performance there is how cool the screenshot looks in F2. Usually, the tighter the formation, the cooler the screenshot.

There's only one real milestone for progress this game actually hard tests you on in aerobatics is AAR, and you're trying to make that free.

Btw, you're talking about the line-up lights on 135, so I guess you're probably flying f15 or f16. The f16 is notoriously difficult to keep in the position, and that's how it should be.

As I said, come to the aerobatics servers and start chasing some tomcats around Kobuleti.

Edited October 14, 2022 by JCTherik

[Exorcet]

16 hours ago, JCTherik said:

The point is to make it realistic as much as possible.

A button that will change your curves...

What happened to realism above all else? This again just like someone being arbitrarily selective.

16 hours ago, JCTherik said:

A button that refuels for you, even if you do still need to connect yourself, I don't think that should be a thing.

OK, but if it's not affecting you, why does what you think matter? Opinions are fine, but not having something just because you don't like it is silly.

16 hours ago, JCTherik said:

you don't have to struggle with attempting AAR.

You're right, we can just have an assist added to the game.

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

You guys haven’t figured out Sharpe is troll yet??  
He can’t concede so stop trying…..