DCS: CH-47F FAQ Discussion

[BIGNEWY]

13 minutes ago, XCNuse said:

This is not to be taken as offense, especially to Nine/BN, but you two really need to get onto someone at work.

This whole situation is just silly; you guys are trying to sell us hopes and dreams and nothing more; I know you two know it's silly, but, you guys are the tip of the spear and someone somewhere, needs a hot iron put to them to get us real information here.

 

What you're feeding us  is like trying to sell us a car, but you can't tell us how many seats it has, you can't tell us if it comes with any wheels, you can't even tell us if it comes with a steering wheel.

 

Someone at ED needs to realize this is a bit of a cluster.

Sorry if you are not happy, we will share more information as we can. 

Please keep the feedback constructive 

[pimp]

9 hours ago, Benno said:

Will we see updated infantry animations when they are entering and exiting the aircraft?

Will we have physical models of infantry/vehicles/cargo in the rear, as currently with CTLD we cannot see infantry in the back of the Huey as an example.

Will we have some sort of crew chief/flight engineer (not sure on correct term) giving us call outs and such for landings? Will this be a Multi Crew slot eventually?

Bumping these important questions. Don't know it got lost. It's the first post. Can someone from ED provide info?

[SteelPig]

18 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

Sorry if you are not happy, we will share more information as we can. 

Please keep the feedback constructive 

EA means core things are missing. No problem with that.
EA doesn't mean I buy a thing and have no clue what I buy. With that I indeed have a problem. 

[Hiob]

6 minutes ago, SteelPig said:

EA means core things are missing. No problem with that.
EA doesn't mean I buy a thing and have no clue what I buy. With that I indeed have a problem. 

Then just wait with the buy until the feature list is updated/published. Problem gone.

Some are acting as if forced to pull the trigger now!

We have at least eight weeks or so to wait for updates, before the module is even expected to drop. Take advantage of that if you're hesitent about missing features.

Edited April 24, 2024 by Hiob

[Hawkeye_UK]

Own pretty much all the modules and know how to use them.  Have been flying flight sim's when able for 30+ years.  I also always pre-order content, that stops with recent events and this is final nail if it needed any reinforcement not to do so.

To bring out a LOGISTICS chopper, and such an iconic one at that, and not have the mechanics inplace for this is pretty insulting and a bit of a disgrace it has to be said.  Once again relying on very talented community coders to part solve your problems is not a solution re moose/mist.  Someone once said DCS stands for Digital Cockpit Simulator and well event's like these are not exactly inspiring to change that gowing perception.  The promise of later in Early Access i think for many now, when it relates to such a core function of a module has worn thin.  For context to this you only have to mention mission planning and ready room for the Suppercarrier, what 4 years on now.  Or Combined Arm's and the state that is in still years on with multiple units in one group, or single threaded servers still, or weapons splash damage and not just on the graphics and trees swaying for content creator video's!  Sadly "high priority" means nothing these days when ED say's it, what about Mi24 cargo, that's been out a few years now and already teased years ago regarding its ability for troop carrier, surely this is the same mechanic?

You only have to read this thread, or one's over on reddit to see that this concept of release has been poorly thought through.

Quite simply bringing out logistics choppers without putting the core engine in, would be the same as Heatblur releasing the F4 without any missiles or bombs, it really is that simple and comparable.

There is no other term for it but an absolute shambles.  You may reply with EA is not for everyone, but when someone that has been buying your products  for along time, only about the CEagle and mig 19 i dont own, and would generally pre-order, and i'm one of many that now won't pre-order, you know something somewhere you messed up.

 

Edited April 24, 2024 by Hawkeye_UK

[SteelPig]

6 minutes ago, Hiob said:

Then just wait with the buy until the feature list is updated/published. Problem gone.

Some are acting as if forced to pull the trigger now!

We have at least eight weeks or so to wait for updates, before the module is even expected to drop. Take advantage of that if you're hesitent about missing features.

 

Uhm,no. Problem not gone. Cause offer something without saying what you offer ist just a bad behavior. 

Edited April 24, 2024 by SteelPig

[Jester986]

I’m not mad about the 47 but I won’t be purchasing until I see some good reviews on it. There’s a problem with modules getting to 90% but can’t go the last mile. I think the business model is in trouble with the work debt versus cash flow problem. I’m sure the chinook will be great, and I’ll happily buy it then. But I’m predicting either a rough launch or a long delay or both. And I’m not thrilled with how things have gone with the lower tier modules. Again no pitch fork and not trying to be rude. I love DCS but my trust is waning. 

Edited April 24, 2024 by Jester986

[SlipHavoc]

16 minutes ago, PatatOorlog said:

Wags addressed a logistics update in a video three years ago

To be clear, here is the totality of what was "addressed" in the Hind video: "In addition to its role as an attack helicopter, the Hind also has a compartment for up to 8 passengers.  This functionality will come later in development as part of a larger update for DCS World."  I think people are ascribing much more to this extremely brief quote than was actually there.

[mono]

Here's some constructive feedback: I will not be putting money into this or any other ED module with an "Early Access" model until ED commits to providing a publicly available, frequently updated development roadmap that at least some chunk of the engaged community deems credible with respect to what it says and when it says it vs. observed reality. A development "roadmap" is a "map" because it contains detailed information about 1. Where the project is now, 2. Where the project's ultimate end state is, and 3. An estimation of expected time of arrival at 2 given the distance between 1 and 2 and the terrain in between. So let's look at this "FAQ" you have provided, instead of what I've just described.

Q: Why is the feature list so light?

9L A: "We wanted to be sure we correctly listed features and when they will come out, either at EA release or during EA. We will continue to update the list here and on the store page as we have more info." 9L then goes on to "answer" "frequently asked" questions about planned work on future features that can only be assessed as falling within the "Full set of features will be announced prior to early access release" on the store listing.

And so this proceeds as basically a series of questions/requests about features that a CH-47 module would be considered a FAILURE if it reached a development-ended state without: logistics, multicrew, gunner station, water landing, etc. but will not be available at launch and ED will not give a detailed answer for expected time of arrival. So like, yes, great, you are working on/planning on working on all these- I should hope so, they're what would make the module worth working on/not a giant waste! If these were not on the way, the only conclusion to draw would be that ED is frittering away resources extending an early access cash sale confidence game instead of strategically improving your existing products! But this is not our first module, we know ED dreams big, so let's interrogate the dream vs. the strategy to instantiate it, not the dream in a vacuum.null 

So to your Frequently Requested Dreams I have included the following questions I ask myself frequently about ED products, maybe you could include your answers to them as well, 9L, please and thank-you:

Q: Is this the module when ED commits to professionalizing its approach to customer/community relations by providing a credible, frequently updated development roadmap for the duration of its lifecycle, in Early Access and Beyond?

Q: What is the size of the team who will be working on this module full time until it exits Early Access?

Q: How many developers can we expect to be flexed onto this module for sprints to major milestones/an internal definition of stable and will be moved to other modules after that?

Q: If ED experiences internal turnover in the devs working the module, or decide to not pay a contractor who's working on the module (for very good or at least legally defensible in certain jurisdictions reasons I'm sure), when can we expect communication from ED about the impact on the module's development?

Q: When a planned feature like water landings is described as waiting on updates to the DCS core before development can begin, can we expect additional information on what exactly is being done and with what level of prioritization in regards to that DCS core work? Supercarrier communication has consistently lacked clarity in terms of what features are simply "in progress" vs delayed pending DCS core updates. Software development being what it is, this can be a porous boundary, but an explanation to the effect of, e.g., "we thought we had an implementation that worked in the current DCS core but it failed such-and-such testing and so $feature now has to wait for $Core_Update" would be appreciated.

[Northstar98]

On 4/24/2024 at 4:31 PM, SlipHavoc said:

To be clear, here is the totality of what was "addressed" in the Hind video: "In addition to its role as an attack helicopter, the Hind also has a compartment for up to 8 passengers.  This functionality will come later in development as part of a larger update for DCS World."  I think people are ascribing much more to this extremely brief quote than was actually there.

And in those 3 years, the only progress on this front is this:

Quote

[...] we will be developing a novel logistics system for the CH-47 and other cargo/transport aircraft, when we have more details to share on what this will entail we will be sure to share.

So we've gone from "we're planning a cargo system update" (paraphrased, but this is what this quote, even if brief, implies) to "we're planning a novel logistics system".

This has supposedly been in the plans for at least 3 years and we still know very little about it, other than that it'll apply to cargo/logistics aircraft and we might be able to use the CH-47F as a sort-of mobile FARP. We haven't even had progress on the details and features about the system, let alone progress on its actual implementation.

I'd hazard a guess that it's this fact that people are concerned about. That in 3 years we still don't even have a list of what this system is supposed to do, especially so when we're now getting modules where transportation and logistics have greater focus, where this functionality is arguably essential for them to have a practical role.

Edited April 28, 2024 by Northstar98

[gnomechild]

5 hours ago, rurounijones said:

> We can say that we are developing a novel logistics system for the CH-47F that dynamically allows the player to determine what is loaded and unloaded from the aircraft based on weight and area.

Will this be accessible via the scripting system (e.g. setting load & unload zones to integrate with this system, limiting what can / cannot be loaded) ? Will there be events emitted to the MSE to allow for scripts to react to loading and unloading events? Will scripts be able to load / unload the aircraft themselves without UI. (e.g. Deploy troops immediately on landing without needing pilot interaction)

Alternatively. Will ED actually actively collaborate with server owners, mission makers and scripters so that a system that meets their needs, as well as any of ED's needs, is delivered?

 

@BIGNEWY, I think these questions might have been missed. But this is something that really really needs to be brought up internally in order for the upcoming logistics work to be fully usable in a multiplayer environment. Not just for the Chinook but for all future logistics aircraft. 

Edited April 24, 2024 by gnomechild
I can't spell

[NineLine]

47 minutes ago, SteelPig said:

EA means core things are missing. No problem with that.
EA doesn't mean I buy a thing and have no clue what I buy. With that I indeed have a problem. 

You are buying the CH-47 and I think based on our past modules you will be buying the most faithful and realistic version seen to date. If you want to wait until further development that is always a choice, this is but one option right now for purchase. YOu are welcome to wait till EA or even after EA. I am not sure why people feel like they need to worry about not purchasing the pre-order, if you don't want to pre-order, then don't this is the info we have to share now, more will come, this is a very important module to us, it will be a great module. That's it, it doesn't have to be complicated or dramatic. 

4 minutes ago, gnomechild said:

@BIGNEWY, I think these questions might have been missed. But this is something that really really needs to be brought up internally in order for the upcoming logistics work to be fully usable in a multiplayer environment. Not just for the Chinook but for all future logistics aircraft. 

 

The questions haven't been missed we just do not have info to share, hence why I asked in the FAQ to share your hopes and desires for everything CH-47 related. It doesn't mean we can answer right now. We will be sharing more on the logistics system and other things CH-47 as we go. Thanks.

[SlipHavoc]

11 minutes ago, PatatOorlog said:

Indeed, it's frustrating that even a small feature like that hasn't materialized after three years.

 

A "small" feature like what?  No specific feature was mentioned.

[gnomechild]

 

4 minutes ago, NineLine said:

The questions haven't been missed we just do not have info to share, hence why I asked in the FAQ to share your hopes and desires for everything CH-47 related. It doesn't mean we can answer right now. We will be sharing more on the logistics system and other things CH-47 as we go. Thanks.

All good, just wanted to make sure they were seen and discussed somewhere. Thanks

[NineLine]

2 minutes ago, SlipHavoc said:

A "small" feature like what?  No specific feature was mentioned.

Guys keep the focus on the CH-47, some are trying to drag it off into another direction, I will only mention that 3 years ago we didn't have the extra performance we do now with MT as well we have Vulcan coming that is going to help new game features such as things coming with the Supercarrier, but again, this thread and FAQ is about the CH-47, please stick with that. If you do not want to buy it right now, then you don't have to but you don't need to share that here, it's OT. Thanks.

2 minutes ago, gnomechild said:

 

All good, just wanted to make sure they were seen and discussed somewhere. Thanks

Yes, we will go through and make sure all questions, requests and wants are passed to the Producer on the CH-47, we have already been doing this 100% Thanks. The issue just becomes when people mess up the thread with OT stuff. Thanks!

[Teeeeeeeter]

Is the expectation that the Chinook will only be available for free flight on release? 

 

I'm genuinely curious what the expected mission profile is like for single player. If it's not moving cargo and troops, what is it that I'm expected to be doing?

 

 

[Strider21]

Information on EA features will be available soon? Why the rush to open up pre-orders then? ED should only open up pre-orders when they are ready to provide information on what the product will entail. 

[NineLine]

Dear all, I have cleaned up the thread some. Please read the FAQ for all the answers we have now.

Please leave your wants and desires for the CH-47F

Please do not use this thread to bring up issues with other modules or any other drama going on right now. I don't want to start handing out warnings, this thread was meant to help inform what we know and see what all of you expect to do and want from the CH-47F. If we can't control ourselves here I will just close it I thought this would be helpful for everyone to express what you want from a CH-47 in DCS. 

[NineLine]

FAQ Edit: Added Steam Pre-order answer. 

Will there be a pre-order on Steam?
Currently no, we will continue to try working with Steam to make something happen, but right now this product doesn't meet Steam's pre-order requirements.

[MorgothNL]

Question:
Aside from certain features, I think many of us assume that the following will be part of the EA. Can you confirm that these are 'finalized' (of course with tweaks possible in the future):
- Flight Model (VRS, Ground effect, general flight model etc etc)
- Damage Model (How does it compare to the invincible Apache DM?)
- All cockpit switches
- Pilot/crew models?
- AI gunners ROA/Burst options as with Huey/HIP/Hind
- Flight envelope limitations (speed, G, blade stall etc)
- System limitations (engines mostly)

Are any of those not included in the EA? And/or are any of those in a early access state?
 

Edited April 24, 2024 by MorgothNL

[Harlikwin]

17 minutes ago, NineLine said:

FAQ Edit: Added Steam Pre-order answer. 

Will there be a pre-order on Steam?
Currently no, we will continue to try working with Steam to make something happen, but right now this product doesn't meet Steam's pre-order requirements.

So what exactly are Steams pre-order requirements? Have they changed since other pre-orders there? IIRC the Viper and others were on steam. 

Edited April 24, 2024 by Harlikwin

[Jester986]

39 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Dear all, I have cleaned up the thread some. Please read the FAQ for all the answers we have now.

Please leave your wants and desires for the CH-47F

Please do not use this thread to bring up issues with other modules or any other drama going on right now. I don't want to start handing out warnings, this thread was meant to help inform what we know and see what all of you expect to do and want from the CH-47F. If we can't control ourselves here I will just close it I thought this would be helpful for everyone to express what you want from a CH-47 in DCS. 

Excellent flight model and systems. Good but not frame rate murdering textures. Logistics ops that impact the battle. Fat cow. Visible crew and cargo. Some generic cargoes are fine but variation based on whether it’s food ammo tents comms gear etc would be nice. Paratroopers. Fast Ropers would be a stretch goal. Load and unloading animations. Oh the crew chief actually has some buttons to press in the back. It would be nice if those work. I actually hate long lining in dcs because I do it in real life and it doesn’t translate well. 
 

oh this is  super high priority for me. Weight and balance and performance planning. This is such a critical part of being a pilot I can’t believe it’s not in the game yet. We need a way to calculate fuel burn and at least IGE and OGE hover. 

Edited April 24, 2024 by Jester986

[AdrianL]

5 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

Have they changed since other pre-orders there

See https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/prepurchase

[Harlikwin]

7 minutes ago, AdrianL said:

See https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/store/prepurchase

I see. Seems like Steam just don't really want to do pre-orders there. Well I guess thats a change on their end. 

[Hawkeye_UK]

1 hour ago, NineLine said:

Guys keep the focus on the CH-47, some are trying to drag it off into another direction, I will only mention that 3 years ago we didn't have the extra performance we do now with MT as well we have Vulcan coming that is going to help new game features such as things coming with the Supercarrier, but again, this thread and FAQ is about the CH-47, please stick with that. If you do not want to buy it right now, then you don't have to but you don't need to share that here, it's OT. Thanks.

Yes, we will go through and make sure all questions, requests and wants are passed to the Producer on the CH-47, we have already been doing this 100% Thanks. The issue just becomes when people mess up the thread with OT stuff. Thanks!

 

Nineline, to be clear we still don't have MT for server's - so are we saying logistics is going to be single player only.

Once again we get back to the core not being ready?