requested earlier Bailed out pilot mechanics

[Archaic]

Would like to see a continuation of your character when you bail out (doesn't appear on F10 and I don't think the game recognizes it as a unit).  Perhaps submenus to use a radio, smoke, flare, etc, and allow interaction with vehicles like helicopters for CSAR. 

[cfrag]

13 hours ago, Archaic said:

Perhaps submenus to use a radio, smoke, flare, etc, and allow interaction with vehicles like helicopters for CSAR. 

Hmmm. How would that work in-game? After you bail out and hit the ground, you then sit around for some 50 minutes or more, and when a helicopter of your faction gets close, you launch a flare, wait to be picked up, and then sit inside the helo for the return trip (say another 30 minutes)? That gaming loop appears to be somewhat, uh, boring. We can much easier replace that with (what some publicly available scripts implement) simply replacing the parachutist with an M4 soldier, and have them auto-lunch a flare and smoke signal, while the formerly (and now replaced by an M4 soldier) downed pilot can engage more bogeys or even fly the CSAR mission.

 

Edited March 11 by cfrag

[Antix70]

The option of either would be great.

We used to do SAR in WWII Online because it effected your score/status as a downed pilot.
If you were shot down and killed, it was counted as a KIA
If you went down and survived, but chose to 'despawn', it counted as an MIA
If you went down and survived and chose to call for help, there were guys who ran trucks around the map just picking up downed pilots, so they could be RTB'd. You could also walk back if you weren't too far away from a friendly base/town.

I don't recall what the penalties were for not RTB'ing from an MIA, I think it was a respawn delay. I remember later that not bringing that plane back meant you couldn't take it up again, and might be forced to take a hurricane instead of the spitfire you sank in the channel.

[cfrag]

48 minutes ago, Antix70 said:

If you were shot down and killed, it was counted as a KIA
If you went down and survived, but chose to 'despawn', it counted as an MIA
If you went down and survived and chose to call for help, there were guys who ran trucks around the map just picking up downed pilots, so they could be RTB'd. You could also walk back if you weren't too far away from a friendly base/town.

I've written some missions where people who survived ejection then had to remain in their downed pilot until rescued(their slot was blocked until they were rescued). The players hated this mechanic to such an extent that they made sure that they never survived (i.e. preferred to go down with the plane). "Walking" home in DCS is not really an option because, let's face it, when it takes you to 10 minutes to walk the distance of your jet's take-off runway, walking home 10-20 miles (which is almost knife fighting distance for most jets and in artillery range for modern arty) will take you hours at least. 

So the next iteration was that I wrote a script that auto-generated csar-missions for an NPC as soon as a player ejected, and when other players successfully retrieved the (now NPC) downed pilot, their pilot pool was replenished. That mechanic was universally accepted as great for helo pilots, and acceptable for everyone else.

The upshot of this is: when you eject, your plane is gone, and as a pilot, the mission is over. Trying to "Rambo" your way home is not something that's fun in DCS, and rightly so. There are enough other games that specialize in making that Rambo part fun, but not DCS. So - IMHO - after ejection, it makes no sense (gameplay wise) to remain with your downed pilot. You have better things to do: for example flying planes or helicopters.

Edited March 11 by cfrag

[Exorcet]

1 hour ago, cfrag said:

Hmmm. How would that work in-game? After you bail out and hit the ground, you then sit around for some 50 minutes or more, and when a helicopter of your faction gets close, you launch a flare, wait to be picked up, and then sit inside the helo for the return trip (say another 30 minutes)? That gaming loop appears to be somewhat, uh, boring.

Besides the limited and slightly clunky mobility of the pilot in DCS, the waiting is fine. Not everyone minds something taking a while.

[cfrag]

10 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Not everyone minds something taking a while.

Agreed. How many would be willing to wait 50+ minutes for a pick-up and then 30+ minutes for delivery before they can re-enter another cockpit, though? I'm mostly playing with people who plan their DCS (quality) time around kids, spouse and work. To them it's rare. They'd just laugh at such a proposal. So yeah, some people might. I believe that the vast majority would bow out of such a mission.

Edited March 11 by cfrag

[Evoman]

As mentioned by cfrag this mechanic would not not be worth implementing with DCS's current state. I myself have ejected many times flying over battle fields in other first person shooters. Except in those games the distances were not that big because the maps were of medium size where it was not too bad to hike it to the nearest ground vehicle to get a ride back to base.

[Exorcet]

48 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Agreed. How many would be willing to wait 50+ minutes for a pick-up and then 30+ minutes for delivery before they can re-enter another cockpit, though? I'm mostly playing with people who plan their DCS (quality) time around kids, spouse and work. To them it's rare. They'd just laugh at such a proposal. So yeah, some people might. I believe that the vast majority would bow out of such a mission.

 

As long as it's not enforced, it should be fine. If there are options then missions/servers can be set to fit the players within. It could even be set on a per person basis. Player A would be set to autorespawn on eject while Player B would take control of the downed pilot.

[cfrag]

17 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

while Player B would take control of the downed pilot.

No doubt that is possible to implement. I'm merely lacking the ability to see that this would in any way be a popular choice: "hey, let's wait for a chopper to hop on, and then wait some more". Maybe we could get an inkling of how this feels if CA allowed people to control infantry (instead of vehicles) and then we could gauge interest in this. Still, playing an infantry soldier seems relatively more interesting (but still not interestingly enough for me - there are dozens of games that can do that better; why would I settle for a sub-par experience?) than playing a downed pilot with a dinky sidearm. To me, it's not a question of "is it possible?" It definitely is. My question is "is it worth it" - will there be gobs of new players joining DCS for the "wait simulator" experience to offset the development cost for that feature? I truly don't know the answer to that, although I am skeptical (tbh, I also hated "death stranding" for an exceptionally boring experience, so maybe I'm simply not geared towards this kind of experience).

[Exorcet]

1 minute ago, cfrag said:

No doubt that is possible to implement. I'm merely lacking the ability to see that this would in any way be a popular choice: "hey, let's wait for a chopper to hop on, and then wait some more".

Indeed it may not be extremely popular, but not everything has to be.

1 minute ago, cfrag said:

Maybe we could get an inkling of how this feels if CA allowed people to control infantry (instead of vehicles) and then we could gauge interest in this. Still, playing an infantry soldier seems relatively more interesting (but still not interestingly enough for me - there are dozens of games that can do that better; why would I settle for a sub-par experience?) than playing a downed pilot with a dinky sidearm.

Integration with CA would be a good idea. If there is concern over being limited to a downed pilot, then don't enforce being limited to just the pilot. Perhaps the player could jump between pilot and friendly infantry, or one of the crew of the rescue chopper. CA already allows jumping around between various units. I also wouldn't label DCS ground forces as a subpar experience. The ground units themselves are simple, but the air units aren't. DCS is superior in modeling that aspect compared to most other games, so what is subpar depends on which components you're interest in.

1 minute ago, cfrag said:

My question is "is it worth it" - will there be gobs of new players joining DCS for the "wait simulator" experience to offset the development cost for that feature? I truly don't know the answer to that, although I am skeptical (tbh, I also hated "death stranding" for an exceptionally boring experience, so maybe I'm simply not geared towards this kind of experience).

That will in part depend on the cost. Something that is zero cost pays itself back even if there is zero return. I don't know where this project would stand in terms of development cost, but if it can worked on over time in small steps that could make it easier for the developers to deal with. That said, looking at this as an addition to CA and CSAR I do see some definite value in it even for the players that wouldn't want to sit around with their downed pilot for the entire duration. You could build situations around the feature to cut out whatever perceived boredom is present, and by allowing players to choose how much they interact with the feature you prevent it from being overbearing.

[upyr1]

Only if we get an Infantry module and it's optional. 

Only if we get an Infantry module and it's optional. 

[Goetsch]

Pilots moving on the ground can only be seen by themselves ......

I think at this stage of MP, ED should at least allow everyone to see pilots moving on the ground :C

[draconus]

16 hours ago, cfrag said:

My question is "is it worth it" - will there be gobs of new players joining DCS for the "wait simulator" experience to offset the development cost for that feature?

Doesn't seem like OP asks for a whole game around the idea. Simple, low cost additions can just enable needed features for those who want to try it.

I certainly would like to experience this, depending on the available pilot survival kit, best if we could:

• run
• lie on the ground
• have a pistol (heli guys can have rifles* or other stuff)
• have a searchlight
• have an inflatable raft
• flare/smoke gun
• emergency radio contact

Then it can expand on mission possibilities: don't get caught, call for help, make your way and meet at some rendez-vous point, get into the vehicle...

*It's been already revealed for new helis although shown working while still in cockpit.

[cfrag]

9 hours ago, draconus said:

I certainly would like to experience this, depending on the available pilot survival kit, best if we could:

• run
• lie on the ground

Just imagine running DCS to experience that. I may sound a bit snarky here; I simply don't think DCS would be a great experience for FPS gaming, while it's great for flight simming. I've already spent too much time in discussion if boots and wings mix well in DCS, and I'd love to be proven wrong. Until then, my experience has been an emphatic no. Again, I'd love to be proven wrong, it would mean even more fun in DCS. 

 

[draconus]

16 hours ago, cfrag said:

I simply don't think DCS would be a great experience for FPS gaming

I don't ask to make it great at once. I'd be happy with any step toward FPS part. It adds options and opens possibilities.

[cfrag]

4 minutes ago, draconus said:

I don't ask to make it great at once. I'd be happy with any step toward FPS part. It adds options and opens possibilities.

Ah! That explains it - thanks! I prefer to have one app to only focus on stellar experiences rather than having a host of shoddy ones -- ones that I can have much better in other apps. But that's merely my preference, and it's as valid as yours. Happily, DCS currently fits both our bills and we both immensely enjoy it  

 

[Hiob]

While I would certainly enjoy this kind of "complete first person experience", I doubt that ED would be well advised to go that route. I mean look at game that have this kind of scope (warthunder, battlefield). Whilst they cover a great spectrum of vehicles and even fps elements to a degree, they offer not much depth in regards to simulation.

I really don't think that you can excel at both.

[Archaic]

On 3/11/2024 at 8:26 AM, cfrag said:

Hmmm. How would that work in-game? After you bail out and hit the ground, you then sit around for some 50 minutes or more, and when a helicopter of your faction gets close, you launch a flare, wait to be picked up, and then sit inside the helo for the return trip (say another 30 minutes)? That gaming loop appears to be somewhat, uh, boring. We can much easier replace that with (what some publicly available scripts implement) simply replacing the parachutist with an M4 soldier, and have them auto-lunch a flare and smoke signal, while the formerly (and now replaced by an M4 soldier) downed pilot can engage more bogeys or even fly the CSAR mission.

 

 

Consider it with an online squadron and complex missions.  Wouldn't be a single player feature.

[cfrag]

1 hour ago, Archaic said:

Consider it with an online squadron and complex missions.  Wouldn't be a single player feature.

That scenario where the player sits on the ground and waits for hours on end to be picked up and flown to a base - that is MP only. How is that going to be a good game experience for the person who first waits and then is being flown home?

[Archaic]

3 hours ago, cfrag said:

That scenario where the player sits on the ground and waits for hours on end to be picked up and flown to a base - that is MP only. How is that going to be a good game experience for the person who first waits and then is being flown home?

It doesn't have to be for hours.  Can have CSAR on standby in missions.  Your scenarios are on the extreme end of pessimism with implementation.  

[cfrag]

33 minutes ago, Archaic said:

Can have CSAR on standby in missions.  Your scenarios are on the extreme end of pessimism with implementation. 

Possibly. Then again, I've written my fair share of missions. If you are in a fast mover and eject, you usually are some 50 km (30 miles) away from a friendly FARP, usually a lot more. If your CSARS are based on an airfield, way more than 50km. So, let's assume that your hot-started helos can be manned within 5 minutes of a splashdown (I'm assuming that your CSAR pilots aren't sitting in their cockpits doing nothing, but can end some other job within 5 minutes -- quite not likely at al). So, ingress 50 km at 200km/ is still at least 15 minutes (more if the LZ or ingress is hot). Pickup & return trip another 15 minutes. Best case scenario here, the downed pilot must wait more than half an hour and can't do anything in that time.  

I've written missions where the players rescue downed pilots before they can fly again. The consensus was 'replace the downed pilot with an NPC and let some player eventually get around to rescue them' (the NPC). Players hated waiting on the ground for the helo to arrive, and consequently preferred (and made sure) not to survive the downing (meaning they did not eject even if they could). Being the evacuee is no fun and boring. If you have 2 hours of quality time this week, you would not want to spend a quarter of that twiddling your thumbs.

I'm sure that there will be the occasional player who likes this, but my impression is that they will be few and far in-between.

Edited March 15 by cfrag

[draconus]

25 minutes ago, cfrag said:

I'm sure that there will be the occasional player who likes this, but my impression is that they will be few and far in-between.

Thank you for supporting this wish, even by just another post repeating yourself

[cfrag]

55 minutes ago, draconus said:

Thank you for supporting this wish, even by just another post repeating yourself

You know I always value your opinions, @draconus, even if passive aggressive and dead wrong  

I surely won't oppose wishes on a wish list. Like diamonds in the rough; I'd like to help and polish them to find the valuable core. That elusive core has evaded me on this one so far.

[Exorcet]

2 hours ago, cfrag said:

I'm sure that there will be the occasional player who likes this, but my impression is that they will be few and far in-between.

That's enough. DCS is already a niche with subniches. Some people only fly helicopters, or modern jets, of WWII props. Features don't need universal support and I feel like that if they try to there is a risk of making it bland.

Your implementation took away choice from the sound of it and that is what looks like the biggest issue with it to me. I don't see it as a reflection of the downed pilot concept in general.

1 hour ago, cfrag said:

 I'd like to help and polish them to find the valuable core. That elusive core has evaded me on this one so far.

I do appreciate this and I wish ED would try to encourage this a little more. Understandably they don't want to have to read through thousands of wishlist posts, but I think back and forth discussion and deep exploration of ideas is a lot better than skimming the title or first post only.

[SharpeXB]

I cannot fathom any human player waiting around on the ground to be rescued. Nor a player waiting around on standby for such a mission. That’s just a severely limited appeal case which isn’t worth the effort from ED IMO. Plus DCS does not have (nor will ever likely have) an interesting or elaborate enough first-person ground experience that would make being a downed airman role worthwhile.