Wishlisted module / era

[Silver_Dragon]

That post has condensate some of wishlisted post previously show on forum on a poll:

[Bremspropeller]

Chads fly Alpha Jets.

 

[MAXsenna]

Cool poll!

Looking at the votes, it seems that the majority wants Cold War fought in Western Europe or the Pacific!

Edited September 19, 2023 by MAXsenna

[Gunfreak]

12 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Cool poll!

Looking at the votes, it seems that the majority wants Cold War fought in Western Europe or the Pacific!

 

Well... technically Vietnam does border  the Pacific.

[FlankerKiller]

18 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:

Well... technically Vietnam does border  the Pacific.

Korea, and Vietnam. Most U.S. Cold War fighting was around the Pacific. 

[FlankerKiller]

I’m torn on early or late Cold War. There were so many little wars is the early period. Indian Civil war, the Suez crisis, the six day war. Everything kinda went at everything and the jets are fairly simple to model. But you’re kinda in fast WWII technology. Late war has less jets and choppers. But you get more technology. There are a ton of late war modules ether in development, or teased. Not to mention it’s supported by Ai assets. I kinda want to see more early stuff. Honestly I want more of both with a big helping of DCS Vietnam right in the middle. 

[MAXsenna]

1 hour ago, Gunfreak said:

Well... technically Vietnam does border  the Pacific.

Nope. Trust me. The Pacific is freezing. Don't trust those Waikiki advertisements!
South China Basin on the other hand, last time I was there. 36C on the surface, and still 33C 36 meters below.

Cheers!
 

[bies]

15 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

Cool poll!

Looking at the votes, it seems that the majority wants Cold War fought in Western Europe or the Pacific!

 

So Korea, Vietnam, Fulda Gap. Yes, that would be awesome.

[MAXsenna]

1 minute ago, bies said:

So Korea, Vietnam, Fulda Gap. Yes, that would be awesome.

Quite sure OP intended Korea and Nam to be of Asian theatre and Pacific as WWII. But I could be wrong.
Fulda Gap ❤, but I sure do hope it would stretch further East.

[Lace]

DCS for me has always been about the aircraft (helicopters included of course).  I like the idea of CA or a RTS element, but really these are sideshows. 

My dream is a fully developed 70s-80s GIUK/BALTAP/Central Front focus for DCS, with a full inventory of AI ground, air and sea assets and an expanded range of 3rd/4th gen aircraft and a fully developed dynamic campaign engine, with varying levels of involvement based on rank (play as a junior wingman and just fly your mission as fragged, or as a more senior Officer, and play from a more strategic perspective - as a pilot. I don't want to be spending half my time organising logistics for ground units)

 

[upyr1]

On 9/19/2023 at 3:57 PM, Gunfreak said:

Well... technically Vietnam does border  the Pacific.

So does Korea.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

So, wildcard suggestion for a theatre:

The Arctic circle during the Cold War. NORAD.

Give me a gigantic mess of interceptors; F-101s, F-102As, F-106s, CF-100s, give them all to me. I want all of them.
 

[Zebra1-1]

Aermacchi MB-326 and Atlas Cheetah

African Border War

[upyr1]

I can't say I am shocked by the results,  though if this poll is accurate despite the sample size, is the lack of interest in ground and naval modules is this becuse DCS simply attracts flight simmers who may or may not be interested in tanks or ships or do we have a good number of nav and tank simmers who think DCS isn't a good platform for ground or naval combat.   

I think that if the Eagle Dynamics and Battleship New Jersey youtube channels uploaded a video featuring Wags and Ryan Szimanski announcing DCS : Iowa-class battleships these numbers might be different. I could be wrong on that. 

As for eras, I know I am more interested in the Cold War than modern and it all comes back to what information we have available. 

  

Edited September 22, 2023 by upyr1

[Gunfreak]

8 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I can't say I am shocked by the results,  though if this poll is accurate despite the sample size, is the lack of interest in ground and naval modules is this becuse DCS simply attracts flight simmers who may or may not be interested in tanks or ships or do we have a good number of nav and tank simmers who think DCS isn't a good platform for ground or naval combat.   

I think that if the Eagle Dynamics and Battleship New Jersey youtube channels uploaded a video featuring Wags and Ryan Szimanski announcing DCS : Iowa-class battleships these numbers might be different. I could be wrong on that. 

As for eras, I know I am more interested in the Cold War than modern and it all comes back to what information we have available. 

  

 

I would be perfectly happy with a ship modual, but that would require completely rebuilding of how ships work. Proper damage modeling, completely new AI to name a few things.

[Northstar98]

10 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I can't say I am shocked by the results,  though if this poll is accurate despite the sample size, is the lack of interest in ground and naval modules is this becuse DCS simply attracts flight simmers who may or may not be interested in tanks or ships or do we have a good number of nav and tank simmers who think DCS isn't a good platform for ground or naval combat.  

I'm speculating, but my guess is that it's probably the latter - I'm certainly in that category (even though I voted in favour of tank and ship modules). But the list of things missing is just so massive that would probably be necessary to implement for a ship module (especially if we're talking about the Cold War and beyond) to really be viable. It's easily enough content and functionality for a whole entire game.

I imagine a similar thing is true for tanks, but there, there are already competitors that already have close to full-fidelity tanks and I imagine that's where those players are.

[upyr1]

6 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

I'm speculating, but my guess is that it's probably the latter - I'm certainly in that category (even though I voted in favour of tank and ship modules). But the list of things missing is just so massive that would probably be necessary to implement for a ship module (especially if we're talking about the Cold War and beyond) to really be viable. It's easily enough content and functionality for a whole entire game.

I imagine a similar thing is true for tanks, but there, there are already competitors that already have close to full-fidelity tanks and I imagine that's where those players are.

I think Eagle should just hire a naval and ground team give them a list of modules to work on and have them make any necessary changes to DCS core. As you know I think the first ship modules should be the Iowa-class battleships. They served off and on throughout World War II and the cold war.  I figure a destroyer or cruiser module should be next

[Nipil]

I believe that the list of problems with the air sim part of DCS is so huge that making ships and ground vehicles modules prior to addressing those is going to be the worst decision they could make. DCS' development speed is already glacial, we wait for many years to get fixes, AI assets and essential features already teased for the air sim part alone. And yet some want ED to spend tremendous effort to build two new subsystems (ships and ground vehicles modules) that would each make a separate game in it's own right. Which would make almost 0 contribution to the pilots' experience in a sim game which is still very far from perfect.

All while already having good dedicated games for tank/ship driving. I mean, let's be realistic, there will never be a good "simulator of everyrhing". Let RTS be RTS, ground combat sims be ground combat sims, naval sims be naval sims. Also, let's be honest once again, we have seen where such efforts lead in the example of CA. An overwhelming majority of players don't need it, because they have better games to play RTS, they come to DCS to fly first and foremost. Let's not push ED away from improving the combat flight simulator and into wasting tremendous resources on things it's not meant to simulate.

Let them instead make a decent AI, proper ATC, clouds that aren't transparent to AI and sensors, finish some modules that have been in EA for 5 years already. Any of these is 100 times more important for the flight sim than having playable ships or tanks or RTS.

Edited September 30, 2023 by Nipil