F-104 Video Report | Fog Progress | Supercarrier Deck Crew | F-16C Arctic Thunder Campaign

[draconus]

4 minutes ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

F-14 yes. 

No for Forrestal ( maybe in the future )

As per news also not for the Stennis at the moment.

Do you have a source on that F-14 compatibility info?

I had my jaw dropped the whole time watching the video above up until the last minute where it turned automatically 180 and Wags also said about automatic teleports. Oh boy - unrealistic! I could just Esc/quit and call it a day after the mission but I want to at least do a proper shut down procedure without the magic 180! Can this be optional?

[Esac_mirmidon]

Wags commented that in the Youtube video.

Search for his replies

[Blackfyre]

18 minutes ago, draconus said:

Do you have a source on that F-14 compatibility info?

 

null

19 minutes ago, draconus said:

I had my jaw dropped the whole time watching the video above up until the last minute where it turned automatically 180 and Wags also said about automatic teleports. Oh boy - unrealistic! I could just Esc/quit and call it a day after the mission but I want to at least do a proper shut down procedure without the magic 180! Can this be optional?

Totally agree, I expected that it will be invisible force pushing you backwards to the parking spot instead of teleport. Kinda disappointing. I hope the work continues and teleportation won't be absolutely necessary. 

[Mistermann]

2 hours ago, draconus said:

I had my jaw dropped the whole time watching the video above up until the last minute where it turned automatically 180 and Wags also said about automatic teleports. Oh boy - unrealistic! I could just Esc/quit and call it a day after the mission but I want to at least do a proper shut down procedure without the magic 180! Can this be optional?

Same here - jaw dropped and fully immersed in Wags' experience.  Looking forward to the patch with great anticipation.  

Personally, I am not too concerned about the Auto180 and suspect they had to make some compromises for various reasons.  I can live with it for now.  Not ideal, but a workable solution for their first release.  

I am more concerned about the speed of recovery operations in MP and the spacing required now that Plane Directors keep players in the way by making them stop to fold wings and foul the deck.  Again, not a show stopper, but something I hope they acknowledge as a problem and commit to addressing.

Overall this looks like an great addition and something my gang will very much appreciate.  Thanks ED!

[Rudel_chw]

3 hours ago, Beirut said:

Can't wait to fart around with the lighting and the fog and get that perfect tasty sunrise. 

 

Here is a tutorial that shows how the Fog looks from within the Mission Editor ... loved that it can be scripted:

 

 

[ouky1991]

So is the multi select tool in the next update too?

[BIGNEWY]

Yes in the next update

[ouky1991]

1 minute ago, BIGNEWY said:

Yes in the next update

Outstanding! Thank you guys

[Beirut]

2 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

Here is a tutorial that shows how the Fog looks from within the Mission Editor ... loved that it can be scripted:

 

 

 

Great video. Thank you. 

 

 

[Hammer1-1]

On 11/16/2024 at 8:47 AM, irisono said:

Great, I see a white knight for DCS.

Well, show me which post you used to make this request to DCS and tell me whether you expected 8500 development hours. Development time that could have been used much more sensibly for more important things.

we've been waiting for decent fog system since Flaming Cliffs 1. yes, we've asked for it for the better part of 2 decades.

[killerwhale]

On 11/15/2024 at 9:03 AM, Graphics said:

 This highly immersive solution, which took more than 8’500 man hours to develop, allows both automatic and manual fog generation and accounts for sensor and AI line-of-sight blocking. 

 

 

While not undermining your effort, I would have spent that much time developing crucial features such as SAVEGAME functions.

[rob10]

45 minutes ago, killerwhale said:

While not undermining your effort, I would have spent that much time developing crucial features such as SAVEGAME functions.

And why do you think they haven't?  It wasn't every developer at ED working on fog and/or the new deck crew.  People seem to forget that ED tend to do things in the background with only the occasional mention of them until it's baked (or at least baked enough that they're going to put it out).  I always go back to the example of multi-threading which a large number of people had wrote off as being abandoned until one day it was added.

[sirrah]

4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Yes in the next update

Watching this small sneak peak, am I correct that we will not be able to create local fog?

Happy to see fog nonetheless, but just wondering (local fog would make it easy to create "divert to alternate" kinda scenarios)

[Gunfreak]

1 hour ago, sirrah said:

Watching this small sneak peak, am I correct that we will not be able to create local fog?

Happy to see fog nonetheless, but just wondering (local fog would make it easy to create "divert to alternate" kinda scenarios)

I guess you could always make sure another airfield is at a higher elevation and so not affected by fog.

But it would be really cool if they added the ability to use trigger zones to add weather. Not just for fog. But dust storm. Local showers etc.

You don't even have to make the trigger zones another shape. "Just" add a built in "irregular " shape to any weather. So if you weather trigger zone is 100 000. Then the fog will be at say 90 000 and then get less dense closer to the 100 000 border.

But that's probably another 8500 man hours.

Edited November 17 by Gunfreak

[sirrah]

6 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

I guess you could always make sure another airfield is at a higher elevation and so not affected by fog.

 

Well, I guess it can also be achieved/simulated with a repetitive trigger (if player inside zone -> fog on). Just a bit more cumbersome and unrealistic.

[Emacs]

Nice update! The new fog looks really great and much better than the one we had so far.

But..

> This highly immersive solution, which took more than 8’500 man hours to develop, allows both automatic and manual fog generation and accounts for sensor and AI line-of-sight blocking.

 

8500 hours is a team of 4 developers working 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for one full year.

I understand that it's not just the fog, but the effect of it on visual and sensor line of sight, but 8500 hours? I can't imagine that to be right.

[Rudel_chw]

10 hours ago, sirrah said:

Watching this small sneak peak, am I correct that we will not be able to create local fog?

It seems to me that it is possible to simulate local fog, since you can adjust the fog amount from within a trigger, so it should be possible to have the departing airfield with thick fog but the destination  with no fog, or viceversa.

46 minutes ago, Emacs said:

but 8500 hours? I can't imagine that to be right.

why put in doubt what the developer says? You think they are lying? … the 8500 can include the development of software tools and frameworks associated with a new tech.

[Bucic]

48 minutes ago, Emacs said:

Nice update! The new fog looks really great and much better than the one we had so far.

But..

> This highly immersive solution, which took more than 8’500 man hours to develop, allows both automatic and manual fog generation and accounts for sensor and AI line-of-sight blocking.

 

8500 hours is a team of 4 developers working 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for one full year.

I understand that it's not just the fog, but the effect of it on visual and sensor line of sight, but 8500 hours? I can't imagine that to be right.

The white paper suggests a significant portion of the effort was literally a research work. Could as well be majority...

[sirrah]

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

It seems to me that it is possible to simulate local fog, since you can adjust the fog amount from within a trigger, so it should be possible to have the departing airfield with thick fog but the destination  with no fog, or viceversa.

Yes, that's what I said in my previous post. It will however be more cumbersome for mission editor (involves triggers and anticipating on what players might or might not do).

Also, I'm very curious on what the sudden and quickly "emerging fog" will look like from the air.
Imagine trying to simulate a fogged up situation only at the players homeplate: Looking at current implementation, a trigger would have to initiate high density fog to suddenly appear over the homeplate, when the player comes near. This will mean that the player will effectively see the fog appear out of nowhere. While in real life, you'd see the high density fog layer from a long distance away, like a "cloud" blanket over your homeplate.

 

But hey, I'm probably just getting ahead of things here . Let's see how it turns out.

It would at some point just be cool if we could easily change the weather/fog type completely and have it kinda area bound (take-off in foggy overcast conditions and have the target area 100nm away, with lightly scattered clouds)
 

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

22 hours ago, Blackfyre said: I expected that it will be invisible force pushing you backwards to the parking spot instead of teleport. Kinda disappointing. I hope the work continues and teleportation won't be absolutely necessary. 

Indeed, I hope it doesn’t make people throw up in VR

[draconus]

Unfortunately allowing for fog change in seconds is not realistic either. Quo vadis DCS?

Edited November 18 by draconus

[draconus]

23 hours ago, Mistermann said:

I am more concerned about the speed of recovery operations in MP and the spacing required now that Plane Directors keep players in the way by making them stop to fold wings and foul the deck.

Wags explained in the video comments that the procedure is ok, he was just lazy there, doing things slowly with all the talking.

On 11/17/2024 at 12:55 PM, Esac_mirmidon said:

Wags commented that in the Youtube video.

So it's a maybe rather than yes:

Quote

Regarding the F-14, we are working with Heatblur to make this happen. It’s cutting it very close to be in the initial release of this feature, but if not, it will be soon after.

[Esac_mirmidon]

His answer was "F-14", so for me is a yes, not a maybe.

[Mistermann]

5 hours ago, draconus said:

Wags explained in the video comments that the procedure is ok, he was just lazy there, doing things slowly with all the talking.

Thanks - haven't gone back to the comments on YT so I would have missed that.  Good to know.

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Mistermann said:

Thanks - haven't gone back to the comments on YT so I would have missed that.  Good to know.

There's even pinned comment now and about leaving LA he says it's still WIP and they still tune it