DCS Features Wish List

I dont want to burst your bubble Dr. Mitsos, but if they are going to release DCS:BS this year I dont think they have time to add alot of new features...

Its no a lot of job... they already have an awesome game by 90%

I have'nt seen the source code for DCS:BS so I can't really say that its alot of job, it might be very easy to add new features, or it may be a real pain in the ass. But fact of the matter is that making software is alot of back and forth, and adding something at a late stage in the production that you did'nt plan for might very well screw up something you've allready added, so you'll have to go back and fix that, and then that will screw up something else and so forth, see my point? But as I said earlier, I have'nt seen the source code for DCS:BS so I dont know if adding new features is easy or hard, but still I would think that at this point in time they are not going to add anything. We are allready in august and if they are going to get the game out this year it should allready be closed to finished.

With that said I agree with alot of the things that you would like to see added, and as far as I can see alot of them will be in the game.

Oh, and just to stay on topic, I would like to see improved vapor effects, not just wingtip vortices as we got in Lock-On. Flanker 2 had great vapor effects though.

Yes, it is a lot of work.

As mentioned before, Black Shark is in feature freeze - no new features are being added at this point. If you have some features you would like to see, suggest them and they will be considered (but not guaranteed to be added) for a future DCS module.

Its no a lot of job... they already have an awesome game by 90%

Yes, it is a lot of work.

 

As mentioned before, Black Shark is in feature freeze - no new features are being added at this point. If you have some features you would like to see, suggest them and they will be considered (but not guaranteed to be added) for a future DCS module.

Of course that's the point of thread, we just keep suggesting because we want the ULTIMATE flight experience. I opened this thread to help developers learn what people wants from DCS. Good or bad its their decision. I just want to help...

Ah, my bad then, I thought this was a thread about things you wanted ED to add in DCS:BS, which seemed a tad late.

Ah, my bad then, I thought this was a thread about things you wanted ED to add in DCS:BS, which seemed a tad late.

Its ok Agg. Here we just speak generaly about DCS series & things we want to see.

.the touch part is just mouse emulation I think.

 

Correct.:thumbup:

I find planning mission in LockOn as very pleasant. I really can't wait to test new ME with new abilities. Triggers allow to prepare a "cinematic" missions. Thanks to this I have already few ideas. But I'd like to see some good examples with living enviroment prepared by ED how they use the triggers ability. Can't wait.

I find planning mission in LockOn as very pleasant.

Very pleasant??? I think it's very static. That fact makes it a hard job to create large missions like for LOCERF. It's also a pain in the a## to assign 10+ waypoints to more than 10 aircraft (50 for a LOCERF mission (plus AI-units)!!!). AI-ATC and -GCI are that dumb that you have to operate human ATC- and GCI-Controler (guys how would maybe prefer to fly...). Can't tell much about flying/creating mission in LO as/for a single player, but from my side not much good to say about LO:FC ME!

Sorry, had to say that... :music_whistling:

Triggers allow to prepare a "cinematic" missions.

"Cinematic" sounds a little bit too negative... or uhm... unrealistic! :smilewink:

I really hope the new ME can fix the weaknesses of the old one. It would longer the lifetime of this Sim-Series (DCS) by years, because it wouldn't begin to bore people and make them leave the game/sim and their squads!

:smartass::music_whistling:

:) that's why I used cinematic with ". I knew your first imagine will be Rambo-like movie story. That's not what I meant. Such "cinematic" missions CAN be realistic. By the way - I wonder if failures can be engaged by the triggers...?

About mission planing: Yes... You're right. The worst thing for me is lack of ability to copy and paste objects. But after all LockOn ME is easy to learn imho. Like it or not? You decide. Some ppl just have more patience than others.

I wonder if failures can be engaged by the triggers...?

That's been mentioned somewhere. IIRC it's not possible but feel free to correct me on this one.

Engine performance optimizations that deal with unnecessary rendering, AI routines, and such... hm...

Just want to see DCS performing good with large missions, lots of engagements going on and all that collateral damage, bomb holes and fires, wrecks and so on ]:->

Currently I have 3GHZ Dual Core CPU and 9800GTX GPU plus 3+GIGS of RAM, I really don't want DCS to make my system absolete again, and have it run semi-smooth after like 7 years when hardware advances ;)

Very pleasant??? I think it's very static. That fact makes it a hard job to create large missions like for LOCERF. It's also a pain in the a## to assign 10+ waypoints to more than 10 aircraft (50 for a LOCERF mission (plus AI-units)!!!). AI-ATC and -GCI are that dumb that you have to operate human ATC- and GCI-Controler (guys how would maybe prefer to fly...). Can't tell much about flying/creating mission in LO as/for a single player, but from my side not much good to say about LO:FC ME!

 

Sorry, had to say that... :music_whistling:

I'm convinced that the LOMAC ME was never intended to accommodate anything even approaching 50 units. Look at the most basic level of units; one plane, one tank, one ship, etc. I think the spirit is that you put in your flight, an enemy CAP or two, an AWACS, a friendly and enemy SAM umbrella, your objectives or targets, and call it finished. Once you go out of the intended scope, it falls apart.

IMHO, guys like Thomas DW are really pushing the envelope. I think DCS is going to remedy this. EvilBivol was asking for information on TO&Es for various ground units.

...and as for what I want for DCS...

Better AI.

Or more human-like AI, rather. Make it have the same constraints a human has, if possible.

Better AI.

 

Or more human-like AI, rather. Make it have the same constraints a human has, if possible.

There's some good news for you. AFAIR every AI plane has view restrictions based on that units cockpit so they can't spot you if you're, say, aproaching from behind & below.

There's some good news for you. AFAIR every AI plane has view restrictions based on that units cockpit so they can't spot you if you're, say, aproaching from behind & below.

That's good news but I would also like to see them model some of the workload a human pilot goes through. Not just turn into me with an automatic lock while shooting, while I have to fiddle with radar to find them. I would also like to see a lot better AI brains period and by this I mean less micromanagement of everything they do. Just as an example they should know when and when not to turn on ECM on their own based on their skill level. I mean my very first simulator/game back in 1997 had a AI that put LOMAC to shame. I will absolutely not buy DCS:BS until I either try a demo for myself or it is confirmed from other users that all these problems with AI are taken care of.

BTW, last night I was practicing 2 F-15 vs 2 Su-30. I told my wingman to attack just to get blown up by my wingman 3 seconds into the flight while he proudly shouts "Two, bandit destroyed!". The ridiculous thing is that I flew the mission 3 times and the same thing happened TWICE! (thats 2 out of 3 times).

You might be either intot he remnants of the friendly fire bug, or, you're in front of him when he's launching actives ...

BTW, last night I was practicing 2 F-15 vs 2 Su-30. I told my wingman to attack just to get blown up by my wingman 3 seconds into the flight while he proudly shouts "Two, bandit destroyed!". The ridiculous thing is that I flew the mission 3 times and the same thing happened TWICE! (thats 2 out of 3 times).

You have to understand that AI is very resource intensive and developing AI that does not "feel" repetitive and reacts different to a given situation everytime you try is not an easy job. I'm sure ED could give us a very advanced AI model at this point if they wanted to but it would cripple just about every pc out there. As everything else, it's a question of compromise.

You might be either intot he remnants of the friendly fire bug, or, you're in front of him when he's launching actives ...

Yep, that is exactly what was happening. I was in front of him the solution ... send him wall before sending him to attack. Still ridiculous that you have to micromanage so many things that should be taken for granted like don't explode your wing leader in front of you.

Another funny thing I found is that say you have a flight of 4 and u go wall and there are bandit at your 2-3 o'clock. You cannot order say wingman 3 to attack before ordering wingman 4 to attack because the genius (wingman 3) will simply bank right and slam into wingman 4.

You have to understand that AI is very resource intensive and developing AI that does not "feel" repetitive and reacts different to a given situation everytime you try is not an easy job. I'm sure ED could give us a very advanced AI model at this point if they wanted to but it would cripple just about every pc out there. As everything else, it's a question of compromise.

I'm sorry but that is nonsense. Like I said ATF (Advanced Tactical Fighters) back in 1997 had an AI that puts LOMAC to shame. There was nothing extrordinary about its AI, they followed no tactics or did anything that made you go "wow, but they were not morons.

This! :doh:

oh man this brings back memories :D

The AI is old and clunky - some day it will get a better replacement.

I'm sorry but that is nonsense. Like I said ATF (Advanced Tactical Fighters) back in 1997 had an AI that puts LOMAC to shame. There was nothing extrordinary about its AI, they followed no tactics or did anything that made you go "wow, but they were not morons.

 

So why exactly is my post nonsense? I talked about the stuff that you mentioned, like the AI having realistic workload and not doing instant locks.

So why exactly is my post nonsense? I talked about the stuff that you mentioned, like the AI having realistic workload and not doing instant locks.

You have to understand that AI is very resource intensive and developing AI that does not "feel" repetitive and reacts different to a given situation everytime you try is not an easy job. I'm sure ED could give us a very advanced AI model at this point if they wanted to but it would cripple just about every pc out there. As everything else, it's a question of compromise.

I was referring about the basic things, like "don't blow me up please". How will this cripple a PC?

BTW I have nothing against friendly fire in certain situations but not in cases like this when u get blown up in formation.

i dont see how it will cripple a PC because if they are just following program material they are not spamming frame killing smoke or doing anything graphically intensive.

I was referring about the basic things, like "don't blow me up please". How will this cripple a PC?

 

It won't. As i stated i was talking about the more advanced stuff, ok?

@graywo1fg

Because advanced AI routines need lots of CPU time themself not just the graphics. I'm not a specialist on AI programming or programming itself apart from a little MATLAB, but i think AI calculations can't easily be divided into parallel threads, so they wont benefit from multiple CPUs (apart from making the AI a separate thread by its own) thus being dependant on a fast CPU, which kind of is a problem as nowadays the trend is towards rather increasing the number of CPU than their speed.