Future Projects Road Map

[joey45]

How could I forget that..

Will edit it in..

 

EDIT: but its a 2 seater though...

[danipelos]

ED did not officially declare it would be a single seater :P

[joey45]

But a single seater would be the better option... For the time being

[mdaitc]

AT-802U - http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2009/06/photos-new-gunship-flies-to-pa.html

[Krippz]

But a single seater would be the better option... For the time being

 

I'm more of the line of thinking that ED will provide us a module for something that they have already received a military contract to do a desktop sim for (e.g. The A-10C conversion trainer). If we use that logic maybe F-15C Golden Eagle . :D who knows

[joey45]

With FC3 I find it less likely.

[shagrat]

Have you seen a good p51 for FSX that costs less than $20? Flight 1 p51 is $35.

 

Check out this. http://www.fspilotshop.com/index.php?cPath=2_70_71&tags=16&sort=2a&page=1

 

Average price for a military plane for FSX is in excess and often nearly or double the $19.99 quoted.

 

Rise of flight, selling add on aircraft up to $15. I just don't get where the complaining is coming from, compared to other sims you are getting value, aren't you?

+1 !!! FSX alone was 130 EUR on launch giving you scrap compared to the DCS' fidelity. Only with third party add-ons FSX got sophisticated plane models, each easily ranging from 10-50 EUR ?

 

A-10C alone is easily worth 50-60 EUR, why not pay for additional features?

 

It's not like they charge $20 for each patch, right? Think about: how much money would you have paid for the "new" CBU-97/105 ? In other games like Rise of Flight they charge for a f...ing gauge or target reticule! :doh:

 

For my part I'm totally happy with the DCS Series and all the nice stuff to come. I will pay for it because it is worth it! Something I can't say for all the titles I bought, during my gaming career.

 

And last but not least, everybody may decide to not buy an add-on he thinks not worth the price, right?

If the alternative is a quick release of some hundred "H.A.W.X" like crap title or the next "Apache Air Assault" I will happily pay for any add-on, feature rich upgrade (BS2) or extension like Battlefield Commander.

 

Thanks ED for reviving the fligt sims. Keep up your brilliant work!

[Eihort]

F-4 v. Mig-21 please

[Gaanalma]

F104 vs Mig21!!

[Madman777]

I like the idea of flying cover for A-10C's with F-15C's. Finally we have units that actually support each other in a very direct way.

 

Looking forward!!

[joey45]

Whatever you feel like Vs Whatever you can get your hands on...

[shagrat]

FEW HOURS of multiplayer ? have you ever played BF 3 ? its the best combat simulation ever .. and its life is infinite

 

Ah, of course! The best F-18 simulation ever! And I love the realistic Info and targeting overlays on your retina, plus the realistic flight model utilizing the gamepad controls to totally realistic flying of a Jet Plane...wow I'm amazed :doh:

Edited November 15, 2011 by shagrat

[leafer]

YES! Love the legend idea cuz I adore all military flying machines from ww2 on up.

 

Iwould like to know aside feom laser etc, can I carry automaric weapons?

[Grimes]

1. Combined Arms. I understand the usefulness of having those features present within the sim. For me it is a question of how those features might have evolved since being implemented in the A-10 beta. I would certainly hope they have been considerably expanded upon in order for them to be part of a payware pack that adds content without actually adding a flyable aircraft. I do question what might occur if this pack contains several highly critical and useful implementations to mission design and scripting where it could potentially split parts of the community to play it. I don't want to ask myself, "do I make a mission with all these extra features and let a few play it as it should, or do I make a mission that allows everyone to play it but its not quite as good as it should be."

 

2. FC3. It depends wholly on the improvements to the aircraft and other features implemented. I honestly think it needs to be at a "DCS 0.6+" level of simulation for a given aircraft in order to make it worthwhile. If the aircraft aren't updated to a decent degree, not even a dynamic campaign would interest some players from making the move.

 

3. Nevada. Extra terrain is about the only DLC type that ED can do where I can't really find much fault in it. Makes me do feel bad for anyone who didn't want to get the beta or didn't know about the A-10C beta as 20$ seems a tad steep for "pre order DLC"

 

4. Flying Legends. What concerns me with the flying legends is its content. ED has been somewhat slow at implementing new 3d objects or replacement models for older art assets. LO, DCS, FC2, and so on have all called on established art assets to populate the world for stuff to kill. As such I see flying legends as more of a FSX type of sim where combat is not the priority. I wouldn't necessarily expect a Battle of Britain type of sim out of the game. Its all rather ambiguous anyways, so I think we can just speculate as to the possible features of the sim. However I think it is worth noting that the heavy usage of the F-18 in the documentary "Independence Day" narrated by Will Smith qualified the F-18 to be classified as a "flying legend"

 

5. DCS Next. Well at least something I agree with 100%.

[ralfidude]

EMB-314 SUper Tocano

 

Could be the BEST solution to a flying legend of aircraft. Its on board computers are similar to the A-10s systems.

 

 

Short and sweet, but to the point:

 

 

ED, can we has dis please? Lol. Imagine, one of these flying side by side of the A-10s?

[Rainmaker]

EMB-314 SUper Tocano

 

Could be the BEST solution to a flying legend of aircraft. Its on board computers are similar to the A-10s systems.

 

 

Short and sweet, but to the point:

 

 

ED, can we has dis please? Lol. Imagine, one of these flying side by side of the A-10s?

 

Ha!

 

I like your style! ;)

 

I wasn't two minutes away from bringing up the A-29 when you posted this.

 

It is modeled after the T-6, so in a round the corner and down the block kind of way...you could make it fit into this category. As you mention, it kind of would have a place in here that makes it a viable option to have along with the rest of DCS. It's a prop job, but one that is up to date and can fall into sync with the A-10 in a CAS role.

 

Now that I say that, why not throw the AT-6 in the mix as well.

Edited November 15, 2011 by Rainmaker

[JS]

It's called "Flying legends", not "Flying aircraft that is completely unknown to all but aviation afficionados".

[Emmer]

A Flying Legend:

 

[XarBat]

EMB-314 SUper Tocano

 

Could be the BEST solution to a flying legend of aircraft. Its on board computers are similar to the A-10s systems.

 

 

Short and sweet, but to the point:

 

 

ED, can we has dis please? Lol. Imagine, one of these flying side by side of the A-10s?

 

This type of thing is just what I am hoping for as well. It would be very fun to fly CAS in a modern combat environment with a prop plane that has semi-modern avionics and optics. And would also be fun to fly a WW2 era aircraft in modern day as long as it has the same level of simulation detail as the other DCS aircraft.

Edited November 15, 2011 by XarBat

[lawndartleo]

how does legacy dovetail into the DCS battlefield, though?

 

Any 3rd world countries still flying A-1H Skyraiders?

[159th_Viper]

how does legacy dovetail into the DCS battlefield, though?

 

Like this:

 

[ralfidude]

Flying at 20 degree nose pitch to keep one's self from stalling just to cruise. Haaahahha. Kidding.

[redfish]

Waiting for DCS:whatever paitently.

 

Then I can properly critique/review.

[Frogisis]

These all sound good to me, and $20 is like, what? A case of beer? A large pizza? Tickets to see some band or comedian your friends really want to go to but you're only lukewarm on? I'm sure we all regularly spend that much money on something we can only enjoy for one night (or at, like, Family Dollar when we need detergent and sponges) without even thinking about it.

 

Will definitely be getting the Commander part and the next jet like everyone else, and I'm one of the privileged Beta preorder people so I'll take that Nevada thank you, but we'll see on FC3 and FL. I'm fully behind both ideas and as much as I love old WWII planes and silk-scarved, leather-jacketed, square-jawed dogfighting, I'm still not sure how much I'd actually (have the time to) fly either of these, unless the new jet turns out to still be more air-to-ground focused: I really want some dedicated, high-fidelity modern air-to-air combat since that's the biggest piece of the puzzle that's missing. Getting a hi-fi F-15C or F-14 would make me squeal like a sugar-addled tween fangirl, but I'll take FC-level detail if that's my only option. And if Flying Legends turns out to have a lot of new "support" stuff beyond just the planes, or just a lot of planes, that'd definitely win me over, too.

 

--- Reading through this thread, I'd never heard of A2A or AccuSim before... I really like that idea of having a plane that's "your baby", and stays consistent with your profile, instead of loading a new one from Platonic Ideal space at the start of each mission. I'm sure this is old news to everyone else, but it's new to me. Plus I'm sick of feeling superior to my friends who play Pokemon.

Edited November 15, 2011 by Frogisis

[Phantom88]

Frogisis,A2A with Accu-sim is really the only reason I still have FSX on my hard drive.It's fantastic!