Official Expansions

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, Dr_Pavelheer said:

@SharpeXB Except you're proposing not one addon but many. And considering how some systems were used over the decades it wouldn't be unreasonable for one mission to require multiple of those asset packs, take for instance Yom Kippur where tons of WW2 stuff was used along with more modern systems.

And it doesn't matter if an asset pack is 5$, 15$ or 50$, what matters is it requires additional purchase and without it people aren't able to join.

This is the reason I want more than aircraft modules. My list of preferences.

• Hifi land and naval modules 
• Some sort of fc style Combined Arms II and Fleet Ops.
• An RTS based on the DCS engine 

If we need to have asset packs then they should be visible in online games 

[upyr1]

8 hours ago, draconus said:

I'm against the asset packs generally but I bought SC and CA because I was interested. I'd probably buy other such packs too and advertise them if they broaden up my possibilities and immersion but I don't understand the movement to allow everyone to join unrestricted. If one wants to test the DLC he can do so for 2 weeks. Why not advertise the pack more instead, since you own it and like it.

 

we're on the same page here.I would rather see more playable options. I believe you also wanted to see combined arms become more of a strategy game. 

[draconus]

1 hour ago, upyr1 said:

we're on the same page here.I would rather see more playable options. I believe you also wanted to see combined arms become more of a strategy game. 

I'm not into strategy (let's wait and see the Dynamic Campaign) but I'd gladly see the development of CA: infantry, vehicles and ships, be it full fidelity, just player controlled or even as AI assets.

[upyr1]

7 hours ago, draconus said:

I'm not into strategy (let's wait and see the Dynamic Campaign) but I'd gladly see the development of CA: infantry, vehicles and ships, be it full fidelity, just player controlled or even as AI assets.

 

I'd love it of ED did a massive overhaul of CA and started on my suggested fleet ops. I figure we need better infantry and a better maritime environment 

[upyr1]

21 hours ago, NineLine said:

Thank you all for your opinions on this, it is greatly appreciated. I think its something to consider for sure, the costs associated with model creation at the levels expected by today's flight sim customers are huge, but this also gives people the ability to support the content they are interested in. It's certainly something to have a discussion about, so keep it up. We are watching and listening!

PS, be kind to each other, at the end of the day we all want the same thing, the very best Combat Flight simulator possible.

 

 

 

I could be wrong, but I believe you stated that most DCS players play offline. If that's the case then the proposal to make them visible on line might not be that big of a problem.  Also there is the issue of trying to increase asset pack sales. I

Edited May 13, 2023 by upyr1