Jump to content

Clarification on future of WW2 Asset Pack


DD_Fenrir

Recommended Posts

@NineLine @BIGNEWY

Hello gents,

Could we ask the development team for news on what the future holds in store for the WW2 Asset pack? 

In particular the status of some items originally slated for inclusion:

  • Bf 109 G-6
  • Hawker Typhoon
  • B-26
  • B-25
  • B-24
  • Avro Lancaster

Also the likelihood of any of the following items to potentially see inclusion:

  • WW2 era Cargo/Tanker Ships
  • Destroyer Class Ship
  • Minesweeper Class Ship
  • WW2 era Mobile AAA vehicles
  • WW2 era Fuel Trucks
  • WW2 era Ambulances
  • WW2 era Fire Fighting Vehicles
  • Eastern Front WW2 Assets
  • Runway Lighting Object for defining runways during twilight operations

I appreciate that we've had a fair few additions that were not originally planned but I think most of us here would agree that those items listed above would massively help to make the WW2 Asset Pack be more usefully complete.


Edited by DD_Fenrir
  • Like 20
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/28/2022 at 4:21 AM, DD_Fenrir said:

@NineLine @BIGNEWY

Hello gents,

Could we ask the development team for news on what the future holds in store for the WW2 Asset pack? 

In particular the status of some items originally slated for inclusion:

  • Bf 109 G-6
  • Hawker Typhoon
  • B-26
  • B-25
  • B-24
  • Avro Lancaster

Also the likelihood of any of the following items to potentially see inclusion:

  • WW2 era Cargo/Tanker Ships
  • Destroyer Class Ship
  • Minesweeper Class Ship
  • WW2 era Mobile AAA vehicles
  • WW2 era Fuel Trucks
  • WW2 era Ambulances
  • WW2 era Fire Fighting Vehicles
  • Eastern Front WW2 Assets
  • Runway Lighting Object for defining runways during twilight operations

I appreciate that we've had a fair few additions that were not originally planned but I think most of us here would agree that those items listed above would massively help to make the WW2 Asset Pack be more usefully complete.

 

I think ED has a lot more priorities on there plate with Dynamic campaign and other AI Aircraft among other things so i don't think we will see them any time soon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2022 at 11:50 PM, NineLine said:

A lot of things have slowed to a crawl, you can blame all hands on deck for Multithreading and all the bumps and lumps that causes as it is added. 

Good information, thanks!

  • Like 2

LeCuvier

Windows 10 Pro 64Bit | i7-4790 CPU |16 GB RAM|SSD System Disk|SSD Gaming Disk| MSI GTX-1080 Gaming 8 GB| Acer XB270HU | TM Warthog HOTAS | VKB Gladiator Pro | MongoosT-50 | MFG Crosswind Pedals | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2022 at 3:50 PM, NineLine said:

A lot of things have slowed to a crawl, you can blame all hands on deck for Multithreading and all the bumps and lumps that causes as it is added. 

Understood about the 'slowed to a crawl' and will ask no further for a time. 

However from a content-creator's standpoint there are a lot of basically essential things missing from WWII.

Mobile AAA vehicles being a huge one. It's a bit hard to create realistic convoys with no mobile AAA. Ju-52 transports would be nice, even if just static etc.

There are minimal AI aircraft to help paint a compelling picture. 

 

There are a lot of irons in the fire across the board, but WWII needs some growth in the assets department - it's like painting with a limited palette right now.

 

 

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/28/2022 at 8:21 PM, DD_Fenrir said:

I appreciate that we've had a fair few additions that were not originally planned but I think most of us here would agree that those items listed above would massively help to make the WW2 Asset Pack be more usefully complete.

Honestly would definitely welcome more Assets (of any era), but would like ED to Focus on the Macro rather than the opposite. Outside of what that particular DLC I think It would be quicker to have 3rd parties take up the challenge. Example: there's 2 particular Modders (Current Hill, Admiral 189) that are producing really first rate assets. What I would like to see is these guys be encouraged to become 3rd parties. I would quite happily pay for these guys mods to become properly supported assets.

On 11/1/2022 at 9:50 AM, NineLine said:

A lot of things have slowed to a crawl, you can blame all hands on deck for Multithreading and all the bumps and lumps that causes as it is added.

When I actually expend some thought on what ED is trying to accomplish, I am 'daunted to say the least at the enormity of what DCS is becoming'. Sure there are occasions when I shake my head and think ED has 'kicked an Own Goal here', or am critical of other particular directions, strategies or choices. But make no mistake I am excited with were DCS is heading.

I am hopeful that some 3rd party asset creators are on the cusp and I hope ED has a strategy to enable Asset making,3rd parties to sell DLC to us eager customers. And leave the big stuff to ED👌.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Understood about the 'slowed to a crawl' and will ask no further for a time. 

However from a content-creator's standpoint there are a lot of basically essential things missing from WWII.

Mobile AAA vehicles being a huge one. It's a bit hard to create realistic convoys with no mobile AAA. Ju-52 transports would be nice, even if just static etc.

There are minimal AI aircraft to help paint a compelling picture. 

 

There are a lot of irons in the fire across the board, but WWII needs some growth in the assets department - it's like painting with a limited palette right now.

 

 

 

+1. And I think the fact that WWII needs more growth in the assets department is one of the biggest reasons I support it as a paid DLC.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the talent of some modders(like the Swedish asset pack) mabye get some kind souls with talent to add stuff. If planes are to hard go get just right. Let people make more ww2 infantry,  flak and ship and make it part of the official asset pack after some quality control from ED.

  • Like 6

i7 13700k @5.2ghz, GTX 3090, 64Gig ram 4800mhz DDR5, M2 drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 11/12/2022 at 12:25 AM, Gunfreak said:

Given the talent of some modders(like the Swedish asset pack) mabye get some kind souls with talent to add stuff. If planes are to hard go get just right. Let people make more ww2 infantry,  flak and ship and make it part of the official asset pack after some quality control from ED.

The problem about them has reach the ED quality standard, and get if that IA units has no a problem with a licenced product. Other has maintain that assets, no a work to ED.

The "2023 and Beyond" not show new WW2 units, include over Normandy 2.0, the channel and Marianas WW2. No propper IJA/IJN on PTO yet. Not sure if the Ju-88 down has by the La-7. Where are the WW2 assets team?

Actually on the assets pack:

- V-1 has no ability to launch them.
- V-2 has missing from Normandy / The Channel.
- Complete the "planned" axis air units (Ju-52, Ju-87, He111) and add more transport / maritime aircrafts.
- Get some bombers to UK (Mosquito B, Short Stirling, Lancaster), atack aircrafts and transports.
- Add more bombers to US (B-24, B-25, A-26).
- Add more vehicles, tanks and AAA to complete WTO.

I start to think ED, with the F6F, move to PTO.


Edited by Silver_Dragon
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

efforts focused on multithreading is good news , but the lack of content in the assets pack is really annoying , the worry is another theatre opening up will divert resources there where I imagine we will get more assets suitable for pto but these wont be usable in the eto , fingers crossed some more efforts directed to add useful content , i aircraft , ships , vehicles to the payware ww2 assets pack.

https://www.marshallfoundation.org/articles-and-features/pilot-james-stewart/

b-24 would be nice

sig sm.png

walshtimothyWW2 virtual flier - currently playing on 4ya ww2 - youtube channel here

https://www.ww2adinfinitum.blog -  https://projectoverlord.co.uk/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 1/5/2023 at 11:40 AM, Silver_Dragon said:

The problem about them has reach the ED quality standard, and get if that IA units has no a problem with a licenced product. Other has maintain that assets, no a work to ED.

The "2023 and Beyond" not show new WW2 units, include over Normandy 2.0, the channel and Marianas WW2. No propper IJA/IJN on PTO yet. Not sure if the Ju-88 down has by the La-7. Where are the WW2 assets team?

Actually on the assets pack:



I start to think ED, with the F6F, move to PTO.

 

 

- V-1 has no ability to launch them.

Agreed. Let's see this enabled as a priority.

- V-2 has missing from Normandy / The Channel.

V2 is not relevant to Normandy as none were operational until September, firing from launch sites in Holland.

- Complete the "planned" axis air units (Ju-52, Ju-87, He111) and add more transport / maritime aircrafts.

Ju 52: maybe, He 111: maybe, but both these types were very much 2nd line (the He 111 relegated to transport duties by this time, it was just too vulnerable) and the Ju 52s were actually not much seen in the ETO after 1943. As for Ju 87: no. It simply is not relevant to the late war ETO. Now, an earlier model as something for the I16 to play with, I can see that being an idea, but without an Eastern Front WW2 map.... meh.

- Get some bombers to UK (Mosquito B, Short Stirling, Lancaster), atack aircrafts and transports.

Again, a dedicated bomber Mosquito is chronologically right but DCS WW2 is about daylight tactical ops; a pure bomber Mosquito at this time is a night-time strategical animal so I question it's relevance.

The Lancaster was used on daylight tactical ops over Normandy so get's thumbs up. Plus a few were used on long range daylight strategic ops around this time so.

The Stirling as a bomber? Late war, no. It was used as a Glider tug by this point in it's Mk.IV form, however, without something to tow, it would be kind of a white elephant.

- Add more bombers to US (B-24, B-25, A-26).

All these would be nice, but the B-26 was by far the most numerous (700-800 in the ETO) and as a daylight tactical medium bomber, the most useful in DCS WW2. The B-25 interestingly enough was only used by the RAF in Northwest Europe as the Mitchell II/III, but again as a daylight tactical medium bomber would be most welcome.

The A-26 didn't arrive till early 1945 so again, is not relevant.

- Add more vehicles, tanks and AAA to complete WTO.

I think the tanks are there; what is needed is more second line ground units that are vulnerable to tactical air attack; fuel bowsers, mobile AAA guns, more towed artillery systems, WW2 mortar teams and ships, both period appropriate merchant and minesweepers, frigates and destroyers on both sides.


Edited by DD_Fenrir
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DD_Fenrir said:

 

- V-1 has no ability to launch them.

Agreed. Let's see this enabled as a priority.

- V-2 has missing from Normandy / The Channel.

V2 is not relevant to Normandy as none were operational until September, firing from launch sites in Holland.

- Complete the "planned" axis air units (Ju-52, Ju-87, He111) and add more transport / maritime aircrafts.

Ju 52: maybe, He 111: maybe, but both these types were very much 2nd line (the He 111 relegated to transport duties by this time, it was just too vulnerable) and the Ju 52s were actually not much seen in the ETO after 1943. As for Ju 87: no. It simply is not relevant to the late war ETO. Now, an earlier model as something for the I16 to play with, I can see that being an idea, but without an Eastern Front WW2 map.... meh.

- Get some bombers to UK (Mosquito B, Short Stirling, Lancaster), atack aircrafts and transports.

Again, a dedicated bomber Mosquito is chronologically right but DCS WW2 is about daylight tactical ops; a pure bomber Mosquito at this time is a night-time strategical animal so I question it's relevance.

The Lancaster was used on daylight tactical ops over Normandy so get's thumbs up. Plus a few were used on long range daylight strategic ops around this time so.

The Stirling as a bomber? Late war, no. It was used as a Glider tug by this point in it's Mk.IV form, however, without something to tow, it would be kind of a white elephant.

- Add more bombers to US (B-24, B-25, A-26).

All these would be nice, but the B-26 was by far the most numerous (700-800 in the ETO) and as a daylight tactical medium bomber, the most useful in DCS WW2. The B-25 interestingly enough was only used by the RAF in Northwest Europe as the Mitchell II/III, but again as a daylight tactical medium bomber would be most welcome.

The A-26 didn't arrive till early 1945 so again, is not relevant.

- Add more vehicles, tanks and AAA to complete WTO.

I think the tanks are there; what is needed is more second line ground units that are vulnerable to tactical air attack; fuel bowsers, mobile AAA guns, more towed artillery systems, WW2 mortar teams and ships, both period appropriate merchant and minesweepers, frigates and destroyers on both sides.

 

I dont center only on "Normandy" disembark timeline, has better start to move to before and after late 44 timeline, has needed WTO equipment to a 1940-early 44 period from Bob (the channel) to Barbarosa and match with a late WTO 45 and a "future" 41-45 ETO map to get some live to the I-16 Type 24 and La-7

  1. V-1 operational start on:
    1. 13 June 44 vs London
  2. V-2 operational start on:
    1. 6 September 44 2 Missfires.
    2. 7 September 44, attacking Paris, France and Essex, UK
    3. https://www.v2rocket.com/start/deployment/timeline.html 
  3. Ju-87B/D has required to Bob and ETO and has a feasible "pilotable" module, a Bf-109E/F/G and Spitfire Mk I/II version as "fast build" modules.
  4. Mosquito B has a "easy" form to implement a pure bomber on WW2, only need some external model changes as bomb bay and forward bomber cockpit, and implemente bombers sight, autopilots, etc. Better with build a new from scratch aircraft.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some more shipping options would be nice. Seine barges of suitably shallow draft for the river. A civilian tramp steamer generic enough for any side to use and bundled with a few liveries for convoy use.

Both WW2 maps have great potential for anti shipping / shipping cover missions but there isn't much to play with, literally.

  • Like 3

DCS WWII player. I run the mission design team behind 4YA WWII, the most popular DCS World War 2 server.

https://www.ProjectOverlord.co.uk - for 4YA WW2 mission stats, mission information, historical research blogs and more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/13/2023 at 5:44 AM, Silver_Dragon said:

I dont center only on "Normandy" disembark timeline, has better start to move to before and after late 44 timeline, has needed WTO equipment to a 1940-early 44 period from Bob (the channel) to Barbarosa and match with a late WTO 45 and a "future" 41-45 ETO map to get some live to the I-16 Type 24 and La-7

  1. V-1 operational start on:
    1. 13 June 44 vs London
  2. V-2 operational start on:
    1. 6 September 44 2 Missfires.
    2. 7 September 44, attacking Paris, France and Essex, UK
    3. https://www.v2rocket.com/start/deployment/timeline.html 
  3. Ju-87B/D has required to Bob and ETO and has a feasible "pilotable" module, a Bf-109E/F/G and Spitfire Mk I/II version as "fast build" modules.
  4. Mosquito B has a "easy" form to implement a pure bomber on WW2, only need some external model changes as bomb bay and forward bomber cockpit, and implemente bombers sight, autopilots, etc. Better with build a new from scratch aircraft.

Couldn't agree more SD. I was initially concerned that Normandy 2.0 was going to reinforce the concept of constricting maps to specific campaigns/time periods, but I have to say I'm really impressed with the way ED/Ugra have worked it out in the end, and will be picking it up once it gets released for DCS stable.

Members like DD_Fenrir have every right to demand that attention to historical timelines be given if for no other reason than to support realism in MP game play. But restricting the type of planes that will combat each other is better addressed by the MP server itself, and can be adjusted from one day to the next.

There is no reason a MP server couldn't use Normandy2's Atlantic Wall in one mission, and Dunkirk as the setting for the next. Using the same map to represent various time periods/battles would make the commercial aspects of map building more feasible, while at the same time increasing value for the customer.   

On 4/13/2023 at 6:15 AM, Skewgear said:

Some more shipping options would be nice. Seine barges of suitably shallow draft for the river. A civilian tramp steamer generic enough for any side to use and bundled with a few liveries for convoy use.

Both WW2 maps have great potential for anti shipping / shipping cover missions but there isn't much to play with, literally.

I just hope once they finally get the core issues ironed out that we see more updates to the WWII/CA part of DCS.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, xfirf said:

Hey @NineLine

is there a list available of open tasks / features still planned to be added like for the Hornet or F-16? Would be really nice to see what we will get someday.

Not sure if you've read this thread, but it might give you some idea. Hasn't seen a lot of updating lately though most likely due to all the other work in progress.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 20 Minuten schrieb Callsign112:

Not sure if you've read this thread, but it might give you some idea. Hasn't seen a lot of updating lately though most likely due to all the other work in progress.

 

Cool. Thanks. Haven't seen this before. 😄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

  LOL.....I gave up asking about the assets pack long ago. I don't even use any of it's content. Was the biggest waste of money for me. WWII was the only reason I came back to ED many years ago when the P-51 came out. I think it's been 2 years since I have even looked at it or used anything from it. It's also one of the reasons why my wallet closed to ED. If you can't keep promises....Don't make promises. 

 Yeah yeah....They need to make money and all of that. But if I make a promise, I keep it even if I have to sacrifice. TRUST! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

ED has to make money, but fleshing out WWII could make them money.  

I just bought the asset pack and Normandy 2.0.

If they would flesh out the asset pack with missing items (even just AI), and fixed certain things like the buff gunner issues,

 

 

then I would even buy a WWII asset pack 2.0 as long as there was an upgrade path.

 

WWII has the advantage of not having to dance around classification issues and it has no shortage of documentation and the platforms are a lot less complex than the highly computerized modern stuff.  

It would also make a very good on-ramp to the DCS ecosystem.  Players who are not quite ready to bite off the systems complexity of a F-15 could get started with good old stick and rudder WWII action. 

Broadens the net casted for new customers.

Hopefully after they put out the MT fires, WWII could get some more love.

$0.02.

 


Edited by [16AGR] CptTrips
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is, for me, one of the biggest downsides of "module purchasing" model.  If it were subscription model, they are "obligated" to produce regular updates, fix bugs, etc.  With the module purchasing model, it's more lucrative to simply focus on new things and capture the money of those that haven't yet spend theirs on the products.  Therefore, you can end up with Warbirds that have bugs going back YEARS, that no one addresses, because: hey, they already bought the module.  They can use it, or park it in the hangar, we already got paid for that module, moving on.

Obviously, with smaller teams and roadmaps, they have to prioritize something and focus on something, they cannot work and fix everything.  But the level of neglect on the WWII area is really, in my opinion, beyond acceptable ranges.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1

I'm Dragon in the Multiplayer servers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2023 at 12:34 PM, [16AGR] CptTrips said:

ED has to make money, but fleshing out WWII could make them money.  

I just bought the asset pack and Normandy 2.0.

If they would flesh out the asset pack with missing items (even just AI), and fixed certain things like the buff gunner issues,

 

 

then I would even buy a WWII asset pack 2.0 as long as there was an upgrade path.

 

WWII has the advantage of not having to dance around classification issues and it has no shortage of documentation and the platforms are a lot less complex than the highly computerized modern stuff.  

It would also make a very good on-ramp to the DCS ecosystem.  Players who are not quite ready to bite off the systems complexity of a F-15 could get started with good old stick and rudder WWII action. 

Broadens the net casted for new customers.

Hopefully after they put out the MT fires, WWII could get some more love.

$0.02.

 

 

Might be just your $0.02, but it makes $millions more in common sense. Couldn't agree more.


Edited by Callsign112
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...