DCS WWII: Europe 1944

[Keyser]

I am looking forward to the kickstarter video to go a little more into the details of this project. For now I am pretty excited and I wish RRG Studios all the best.

 

In the whole "seperate install" thing I come out as undecided. I have 200 gigs of free space on my SSD, and while I understand that some people are justifiably bothered by the economy of this solution (storage and bandwidth-wise), for me personally it will not influence any purchasing or backing decision much at all.

 

However, I would like to put this concern out there: I am not sure it will be easy or even possible to use the European theater in a proper modern-era mission. I would like that a lot. The modules are cross-compatible, sure, but luthier already said there is some uncertainty about the ground units etc.

Can mission designers place modern AAA and SAMs into the European theater? Can the airbases in the theater be equipped with ILS? Will the WW2 core support modern weapons systems, lasing, etc.? Will the European theater only later become fully useable for the modern-era (and will that be for an "upgrade-fee" akin to Black-Shark 2)?

 

I remember you saying that you don't know these details yet, luthier, so I'm not expecting an answer now, but it is something I would hope to have adressed in the kickstarter campaign. It will inform my decision of whether to back (and to what amount) greatly.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Keyser
typos

[kontiuka]

You could learn Finnish. :D

Who do I look like, Sheldon Cooper?:)

[Vampyre]

i had the same question, and according to what luthier1 answered to me here (russian speaking dcs forum section):

 

"The engine (EDGE) is fully functional. On 5th of September we will release screenshots of the Normandy terrain showing houses, trenches, bunkers, landmarks, cliffs, sea, trees and many other things ..."

 

i do actually consider that as the most exciting news in DCS world of the past 5 years...

 

i can wait for the rest, but please just get me out of the black sea area asap! :pilotfly:

Very exciting indeed. I can't wait to see how large and detailed the new maps will be. I hope we will have some truely long ranges on the maps (large enough for medium or heavy bomber employment and long range escort missions). I'm with you on wanting out of the Black Sea.

[NineLine]

Yup, if the B-17 is planned in either AI or flyable, lets hope for full range B-17 missions :)

 

Very exciting indeed. I can't wait to see how large and detailed the new maps will be. I hope we will have some truely long ranges on the maps (large enough for medium or heavy bomber employment and long range escort missions). I'm with you on wanting out of the Black Sea.

[Python]

Yup, if the B-17 is planned in either AI or flyable, lets hope for full range B-17 missions :)

 

 

Goes off to watch Memphis Belle in preparation! :joystick:

[morse]

Yup, if the B-17 is planned in either AI or flyable, lets hope for full range B-17 missions :)

 

+1 for the B17 flyable :thumbup:

[Hans-Joachim Marseille]

Add Lancaster and Mosquito to the mix please ... night bombing raids.

 

UK: Spitfire Mk XIV, Mosquito, Lancaster

US: P-51D, P-38, B-17

Germany: Fw 190D, Bf 109G, Ju 88G, Me 262

Edited September 3, 2013 by Hans-Joachim Marseille

[NineLine]

Add Lancaster and Mosquito to the mix please ... night bombing raids.

 

I better hope for a gunners seat of I will end up fling my crew off the map when I get completely lost :) :dunno:

[Hans-Joachim Marseille]

I better hope for a gunners seat of I will end up fling my crew off the map when I get completely lost :) :dunno:

That's what the Mosquito's are for ... target marking (Pathfinder mission) and defence.

[Python]

A mosquito would be immense, I just hope the sounds are up to the job, Two Merlins mounted to the side should really be something to test our speakers. :thumbup:

[Grim_Smiles]

Looking forward to DCS WWII Europe, would be a lot of fun.

 

Yup, if the B-17 is planned in either AI or flyable, lets hope for full range B-17 missions :)

 

Would be great to have scenarios with multiple B-17s with full player crews fighting through to a target, especially when added in with Allied players escorting and German players trying to stop them from reaching a target. Not sure if something like that would work though in the frame rate and lag department. But I can certainly hope for it.

[kontiuka]

^

Good thing the trees are now gonna be solid. Gonna need a lot of wood to make the wooden wonder.

[Raven68]

I better hope for a gunners seat of I will end up fling my crew off the map when I get completely lost :) :dunno:

 

 

:megalol: I dont think you would be that bad Sith! If you take the role of a B-17 pilot I would ride with you anytime! ;)

[luthier1]

Whew. Let's get on with it.

 

My move and internet situation are really inconvenient. I apologize for being unavailable so much.

 

Just to be clear, although I suspect the P-51 will be in the initial package, if it weren't would we be able to use our DCSW P51D or is it a complete re-vamp of the existing one? In fact that question applies to all DCSW aircraft.

 

The P-51 and the Dora will be exact copies of the aircraft from DCS World. They are perfect. We are not touching them.

 

I think it would be just best to get the option. Let the WWII Simmers get their own World-lite version, and just let us old World people merge the two installations. I don't think it gets more simple than that. Other than the devs having to ensure compatibility for every module they release.

 

I have to say that I did not expect such a strong response to the separate install for DCS WWII.

 

We are at this time just basically making DCS World modules, and we're months away from having our own executable or install. Theoretically we could go back and discuss this internally, but we're unfortunately almost out of time. Launching a Kickstarter carries with it certain obligations; since we're describing our product as I explained it, we can't eventually change our minds and release it as a generic DCS World module.

 

Please rest assured that this decision was made for one reason and one reason only: ease of access in the long run. There are a lot of variables here that have to be considered. We thought we made the best decision possible, but since so many people are unhappy, we are unhappy.

 

We will keep a separate install for DCS WWII due to our Kickstarter obligations, but we'll go back and think this over and try to make sure we also provide for an easy seamless option for DCS World users.

 

If one of the kickstarter goals means we get to fly a Lancaster, I may have to take out a loan...

 

We are definitely considering night operations, but not initially. There's too much that needs to be done, and we're trying to go lean initially. You need to have historical radar, searchlights, airborne radar and night interceptors with their own AI etc. It's a huge project. I don't think we could pull this at the moment, and if we add it as a kickstarter stretch goal, I am really not sure we'd be able to get the hundreds of thousands of dollars something like this would cost.

 

Ugh, I hate that low velocity weapon.

 

Since this is going to be a 1944 ETO sim, I would hope for a 109G-6/AS. That's an important aircraft for simulating the high altitude operations of the period.

 

We're going a bit higher. Here's a much better thing for everyone to bicker about.

 

We decided on the K-4 because it's the best documented 109. If we were to go with a G-something, margin of error would be a lot higher because source data has so many holes in it.

 

and the Mosquito NF mk XIX, Bf-110G-4, P-61B Black Widow, and F4U-2 Corsair. Of course we will also need Lancasters, Wellingtons, Halafax, Stirlings, Hampdens, Ju-88A-4, He-111H-6, Me-410B, G4M Betty's as well as effective spotlights, ground radars/control and a way to provide an incentive for pilots to fly bombers to targets at night through Flak and enemy night fighters.

 

See above about the night module.

 

And at the IL2:BOS site it is not allowed to discuss the DCS WWII sim at the moment.

 

Anyway, waiting in anticipation to see the first screenshots and vids of DCS WWII.

 

I really don't see how it's my business as a developer to compare and contrast products. On one hand, I am probably biased towards my own work; on the other, I'm perhaps a bit too honest from a marketing standpoint.

 

In any case, neither their product nor mine are publicly available yet. There's no business more futile than arguing about developer promises.

 

And once the community gets their hands on all the upcoming WWII sims, developer opinions won't matter much either, right?

 

@Luthier:

 

What were some of the other title choices for this sim? You mentioned a possibility for a very awkward name, what was it?

 

This is the awkward name I was talking about.

 

I'm more of a fan of more poetic names like Skies of Blood or Iron Rain (joke names I just came up with), but I guess we decided on this one out of all the options.

 

And anyone knows why September 1st was/is an important date to announce this?

 

Need the money by October so we can knock together a proper team for what we're trying to build.

 

September 1st is also the day Luthier invaded a mansion in anticipation of great wealth. :D

 

Actually, moved out of a large three-bedroom mansion into a tiny one-bedroom.

 

Developing flight sims is a lot of fun, but it's not very profitable.

 

Question:

Planned new engine EDZH.

There-there "material" trees?

I mean, with collisions? Test right now.

 

My interpretation: EDGE will provide new trees that are not just sprites, but "real" - aka block line of sight and will actually get into our way if we fly too low :D

 

The problem with tree collisions, at least in my past experience, is just in the sheer number of collision objects.

 

There is probably a hundred million trees and bushes across a large gameplay map.

 

That's potentially up to a hundred million collision objects for the engine to track. You obviously need to track the trees any place there are planes at lower altitude. In a multiplayer match, for example, where you can have dozens of people flying all over the map, you may potentially need to track every single tree across the map. An extreme case, but you know what I mean. All these trees also need to be tracked constantly, every tick, multiple times a second.

 

You can't check for collisions between millions of 3D objects 20 times a second.

 

This kills the PC.

 

All right, I'll be here another 10-15 minutes. Ask away!

[NineLine]

Well lets hope RRG can make a Flyable B-17 happen then, and we will find out :)

 

:megalol: I dont think you would be that bad Sith! If you take the role of a B-17 pilot I would ride with you anytime! ;)

[luthier1]

Also, sorry if I missed anyone's questions. Please quote yourself and ask again, I'll try to answer.

 

And most importantly THANK YOU everyone for your kind words and wishes. I just really, really, really love aviation and it's a huge honor for me to be doing this. I feel like one of the luckiest people in the world to have my main passion as my job. I am unbelievably excited about this project, about working with my old colleagues, interacting with many old friends, and making new ones.

 

Can't wait to fly my own game!

[Cibit]

What from your perspective are the limitations for multi crew aircraft with playable slots like IL2, That for me is where the fun lies:)

[NineLine]

We decided on the K-4 because it's the best documented 109. If we were to go with a G-something, margin of error would be a lot higher because source data has so many holes in it.

 

I wont argue against any 109 variant, but whomever is looking for documents for you might be looking in the wrong places if they cant find a good whack of G series documents ;)

[alexbap]

There is probably a hundred million trees and bushes across a large gameplay map.

 

Luthier, isn't terrain a multi-million poly object?

Isn't possible to incorporate trees on terrain like they were part of terrain to use same computer resources?

[luthier1]

What from your perspective are the limitations for multi crew aircraft with playable slots like IL2, That for me is where the fun lies:)

 

We really haven't gotten into this very deeply at this stage. We're only going there if we hit kickstarter strech goals. If we do, we'll get to work on it, and then a few months later we'll have a much better idea of the limitations.

 

I wont argue against any 109 variant, but whomever is looking for documents for you might be looking in the wrong places if they cant find a good whack of G series documents ;)

 

Oh, we have tons of the Gs, we just have a lot more on the K. Or rather, we have better stuff that's more applicable to our needs for the K-4.

 

Luthier, isn't terrain a multi-million poly object?

Isn't possible to incorporate trees on terrain like they were part of terrain to use same computer resources?

 

Not much of a difference between tracking a gazillion boxes, or a single gazillion-polygon object.

[zaelu]

I have to say that I did not expect such a strong response to the separate install for DCS WWII.

 

We are at this time just basically making DCS World modules, and we're months away from having our own executable or install. Theoretically we could go back and discuss this internally, but we're unfortunately almost out of time. Launching a Kickstarter carries with it certain obligations; since we're describing our product as I explained it, we can't eventually change our minds and release it as a generic DCS World module.

 

Please rest assured that this decision was made for one reason and one reason only: ease of access in the long run. There are a lot of variables here that have to be considered. We thought we made the best decision possible, but since so many people are unhappy, we are unhappy.

 

We will keep a separate install for DCS WWII due to our Kickstarter obligations, but we'll go back and think this over and try to make sure we also provide for an easy seamless option for DCS World users.

 

Please do rethink it. There is plenty of time. If the two "worlds" will be so similar it will be easy... sort of...

 

Please (when you have time) listen to Matt Wagner words in this video. DCS is the true Sandbox Simulator... please if it's true... let it be the truth not anything else. min 1:50

 

Edited September 3, 2013 by zaelu

[NineLine]

We really haven't gotten into this very deeply at this stage. We're only going there if we hit kickstarter strech goals. If we do, we'll get to work on it, and then a few months later we'll have a much better idea of the limitations.

 

A multiplayer/multiposition bomber could move you back into that mansion if you could pull it off at a high fidelity/DCS Level. I would even drive down the coast and help you move again ;)

[TimeKilla]

 

Actually, moved out of a large three-bedroom mansion into a tiny one-bedroom.

 

Developing flight sims is a lot of fun, but it's not very profitable.

 

Glad there is dev's like you and the DCS team and 3rd parties that are willing to put there time into making great flight sims all the best with this endeavour.

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

Luthier...

in the last view days you answered more questions and have been more communicative than in two years of clod.

it also seems, that you are way more passionate about this project, at least thats my impression so far.

i really hope for all of us, you included, that you really pull this off this time, and create the most realistic WWII sim.

 

how often, after the kickstarter vid, do you think will you be able to give us developement updates?will you remain in general more communicative with us, than you have been in clod?

and one personal question im intersted in...

what makes you more passionate about this sim, than about the previous game?

[kontiuka]

Luthier, isn't terrain a multi-million poly object?

Isn't possible to incorporate trees on terrain like they were part of terrain to use same computer resources?

I know nothing about anything on this topic but isn't there an old software technique (like going back to Asteroids) where you have preliminary collision zones. So, if you have say a group of 10,000 trees, you have a big invisible box that surrounds that group of trees. So, you'd only have to check if, for example, a plane is within that big box. If it is, then you do more fine-grain collision checks. Like I said, know nothing about this stuff so be kind.:)

 

You could pull off a similar effect with trigger zones, I suppose.