Ability to fly other aircraft

[EtherealN]

So are military simulators. :P (Computer-based, that is, damn people are fast in posting while I type...)

 

As for not being daft enough to request a watering down, I would venture so far as to say that quite a few people do want that. Your request on the Comanche, honest or not, would not be the first time we've seen that and been forced to explain what the point is.

 

And yeah Chibawang, one of the reasons I am more hopeful of DCS being financially viable at this level of fidelity is the fact that it doesn't need the same level of market success, since part of the development costs would be shared between military and commercial products. If they were doing this entirely without any military contracts I'd be very very worried about whether they have a snowball's chance in hell of surviving.

 

I also want to chime in on your opinion about the whole "couldn't charge for four modules instead of two" thing. I'd much rather spend money on them separately and get all airframes at or above BS level of fidelity than get them two-and-two and thereby get a diluted product. It's almost a miracle that they managed to get the financial space to do something like this in todays gaming markets already, if they were to do double implementations for the same revenue they'd almost certainly go the way of the dodo.

 

EDITS:

Accepting Sharkster's correction though, but I think there are a few too many worries being levelled about the whole multiplayer thing. (Can't be arsed to go back to check who it was that said that though.) We aren't going to see a scenario where no-one dares fly MP with the Ka-50 because the A-10's will massively own them. All one has to do to avoid that is to be careful when making the multiplayer maps. If there's no A-10's to fly in the map, there's nothing to worry about. If there are, then any map that doesn't take this into consideration will not stay up on the servers. In fact, any multiplayer map including both wouldn't have them on a "kill each other" scenario, since that would be outright stupid. They'd have each their own objectives that might intersect (and give some seriously tense moments of fun) and the map could then be won depending on which side best fullfills their objectives.

Edited March 28, 2009 by EtherealN
I'm slow.

[GGTharos]

No, they are getting military contracts for creating simulations for militaries, and then that knowledge and simulation of those aircraft are passed on to us in a form of simulation of that particular aircraft.

 

And forget the Su-39, there's no military that operates it ... ie. there will not be a contract for it.

 

Well of course they are doing it right in their minds, they are trying to make a profit by appealing to the Helicopter fans and the jet fans. It's not like I don't know whats going on. They should be releasing these modules with two helicopters rather than one, (Ka-50 and AH-64A) and two jets rather than one, (SU-39 and A-10). This would give the multiplayers a standoff weapon. But of course then they couldn't charge for four modules instead of two. But the way I look at it, you could still make them all separate, charging for each aircraft individually, but selling the standoff aircraft at the same time. I would buy both the AH-64a and the Black Shark at the same time.

[Sharkster64]

No, they are getting military contracts for creating simulations for militaries, and then that knowledge and simulation of those aircraft are passed on to us in a form of simulation of that particular aircraft.

 

And forget the Su-39, there's no military that operates it ... ie. there will not be a contract for it.

I was just quoting the SU-39 as an example. I don't know all the aircraft you guys have in mind for modules. But I do know that the AH-64a is planned and I am DESPERATE for this one!!!

[EtherealN]

And forget the Su-39, there's no military that operates it ... ie. there will not be a contract for it.

 

Damn shame though, that.

 

But I do know that the AH-64a is planned and I am DESPERATE for this one!!!

 

Quite a bunch of people that are desperate for the A-10C too, tho. :P

Personally, I'm desperate for both. :D

[Sharkster64]

Damn shame though, that.

 

 

 

Quite a bunch of people that are desperate for the A-10C too, tho. :P

Personally, I'm desperate for both. :D

I'm not saying that they shouldn't make an A-10 module or any other Fighter module for that matter. I'm just saying that it would be nice to see a standoff weapon to the Ka-50 come out first if not at the same time as Black Shark. Then go with the A-10 and a standoff to that airplane as well at the same time, CHARGING FOR EACH ONE SEPERATELY OF COURSE. But this is just my opinion.

[EtherealN]

I do see your point, but on the other hand getting the AH-64 before the A-10 would mean a longer time with less variation within the series. So while there would be a nice adversary mode up for grabs, we would still have to go back to LOMAC to do any fixed-wing action.

 

Whether I would cry over that I don't really know though, I'm really loving it as a chopper pilot atm. But I'd personally much rather have the A-10 first and thereby at least have the option of switching between rotary and fixed.

[Frakin Toasters]

[EDIT BY MOD: RULE 1.2] I am here for the community spirit, and to enjoy the company and discourse provided by other people who also enjoy this game[...]

Edited March 28, 2009 by Acedy

[EtherealN]

If he is a person that prey on provoking reactions, I think you just gave him what he wants.

 

Not saying it's the truth, but I don't quite see a gain to the thread in something like that. PM's are awesome for vendettas. ;)

[GGTharos]

Another peep for you two (you know who you are) and it's purgatory :P

Edited March 28, 2009 by GGTharos

[Frakin Toasters]

I just don't give a damn, y'know? If i'm going to voice my opinion, i'm going to do it in public. I've spent all day in a crappy job doing quite demanding work. I got in at midnight. I want to come here and unwind a bit with some like-minded people, if i get defensive over what he says then so be it. [EDIT BY MOD: RULE 1.2]

Edited March 28, 2009 by Acedy

[Sharkster64]

I do see your point, but on the other hand getting the AH-64 before the A-10 would mean a longer time with less variation within the series. So while there would be a nice adversary mode up for grabs, we would still have to go back to LOMAC to do any fixed-wing action.

 

Whether I would cry over that I don't really know though, I'm really loving it as a chopper pilot atm. But I'd personally much rather have the A-10 first and thereby at least have the option of switching between rotary and fixed.

I have to admit though, when the apache does come out, I can't see myself going back to the black shark. I've just always dreamed of flying the apache. I absolutely loved the Janes Longbow series and played those for quite a while, (until the graphics just were not that good anymore). I can definitely see a rise in sales when they bring out the apache, especially with the multiplayer dual cockpit. I don't think, (for me that is) that I'm going to be the slightest bit interested in switching back and forth between modules, especially if they bring the same amount of realism to the apache as they did with Black Shark. But thank you for seeing my point. ;)

[GGTharos]

I can, but that's not excuse for you either, Toasters. Like I said - it's over.

[Frakin Toasters]

You didn't actually say it was over, instead of saying "peep from" you said, "peep for", which made absolutely no sense. However now i understand.

[Frakin Toasters]

lol, oh right. ;)

 

So errr. Is there such a thing as a Cobra sim? That seems like an interesting chopper

[Sharkster64]

lol, oh right. ;)

 

So errr. Is there such a thing as a Cobra sim? That seems like an interesting chopper

That is another chopper I would love to see modeled here.

[Acedy]

I felt a great disturbance in the Force...as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. ;)

 

Guys, I edited/deleted some posts, and I may remind you of forum rule 1.2:

 

Members must treat other with respect and tolerance. Material that is offensive, insulting or constitutes an attack against any individual or group will be subject to administrative actions.

 

If you cannot cope with other people's opinions, please leave the thread. Next time I will hand out warnings! Thanks.

[sobek]

I'm not saying that they shouldn't make an A-10 module or any other Fighter module for that matter. I'm just saying that it would be nice to see a standoff weapon to the Ka-50 come out first if not at the same time as Black Shark. Then go with the A-10 and a standoff to that airplane as well at the same time, CHARGING FOR EACH ONE SEPERATELY OF COURSE. But this is just my opinion.

 

I think you view the aim of this series wrong. It is not intended to produce a balanced east versus west multiplayer experience. That would be unrealistic because the airframes are not balanced in real life as well. Where one airframe might be outstanding, another may lack.

 

Multiplayer missions would then have to take the roles of units into account, meaning that when east employs the BS, west would not counter with the apache. I mean, what is the point in having faithfully recreated units modelled to a very high standard and then using them in absolutely off topic missions like heli vs heli.

 

Thinking just in a pvp head to head east versus west style does not do this sim justice.

 

Btw. History keeps repeating itself, there has been the same discussion some months ago, so plz search the forum *yawn*

[nemises]

I have thought of a nice way to work with disparate airframes / technologies, if, some time in the future we have all of the DCS modules up and running.

 

Each airframe is worth a value.

In the setup of a large mutliplayer scenario, each side (red / blue) has a "budget" and can "purchase" the airframes they want up to the level of their budget.

 

The lower tech airframes (Ka50, mi24, AH64a, su25) are inexpensive compared to the high tech airframes (A10c, F16c, F15c etc..) and so it is a compramise between the number of airframes you can "afford" and the relative technology levels.

 

So you might choose to purchase 4x KA50's , or 1 x A10 with the same "money" to achieve the same goal...

 

In this way, all of the airframes might get used , not necessarily because they are the best for the job , but because the "budget" is worked out in such a way that it is the most efficient use of it.

 

If this kind of system can be utilised (say in big red flag type events) , then I can see ALL ariframe types beeing used and beeing useful, rather than everyone flying the high tech range killers.

..just an idle thought.

[Acedy]

So errr. Is there such a thing as a Cobra sim? That seems like an interesting chopper

 

The Yankee Air Pirates 2 mod for WOV features Hueys, I don't know if they also have Cobras.

 

I would kill for a high-fidelity sim of any of those two aircraft. ;)

[WynnTTr]

I have thought of a nice way to work with disparate airframes / technologies, if, some time in the future we have all of the DCS modules up and running.

 

Each airframe is worth a value.

In the setup of a large mutliplayer scenario, each side (red / blue) has a "budget" and can "purchase" the airframes they want up to the level of their budget.

 

The lower tech airframes (Ka50, mi24, AH64a, su25) are inexpensive compared to the high tech airframes (A10c, F16c, F15c etc..) and so it is a compramise between the number of airframes you can "afford" and the relative technology levels.

 

So you might choose to purchase 4x KA50's , or 1 x A10 with the same "money" to achieve the same goal...

 

In this way, all of the airframes might get used , not necessarily because they are the best for the job , but because the "budget" is worked out in such a way that it is the most efficient use of it.

 

If this kind of system can be utilised (say in big red flag type events) , then I can see ALL ariframe types beeing used and beeing useful, rather than everyone flying the high tech range killers.

..just an idle thought.

That's not a bad idea, but who's gonna want to fly the bs if apaches are available? Without a doubt, 95% of players will be clamouring for the best tech - then we'll have a game that's like BF2, where ppl were running for the jets, then some a**hole being pissed off about not getting it and starts tk'ing...

[nemises]

^^ yeah, it wouldn't work in the open-ended airquake online server scenario...

 

I'm more thinking in terms of any big organised events wih pre-planning etc..aka red flag / black sea showdown / co-operative archer etc... where the planning stage work out how many of each type of aircraft to "buy" , and then people sign up to fly em..

 

..like I said, just a thought

[GGTharos]

It can work for the open-ended stuff too, so long as the 'open ended stuff' is well planned out in the mission editor ;)

 

The trick is to give everyone their job - you bet there'll be pilots for both sides to be found ... the side who doesn't do their job loses.

[Boberro]

I never seen so red thread yet :)

[sobek]

I never seen so red thread yet :)

 

Look for the discussion about the russian download version from the time where it was released. Also those naggy StarForce whine threads. :) But do it only if your faith in humanity has already vanished :doh:

[congo]

My two cents!

 

DCS has the right to produce and market their products however they see fit.