DCS WW2 Train Module

[Devil 505]

Not sure if any of you have ever played Train Simulator but they are the equivalent of DCS for trains. I know everybody wants more aircraft but I played this train sim and it's fairly challenging and fun to learn like these aircraft.

 

What do you guys think of a correct time period WW2 train module implemented into the WW2 map. Use it to transport materials, troops, equipment etc to the front lines and back. Armored German trains with flak on them. Trains were used extensively during the war and the primary target of many missions on both sides.

 

It would make great for protection detailed missions and our train enthusiast or new guys like myself that want to help the war efforts from the ground. I'm pretty sure these guys over at the Train Sim might be interested in working on a module for DCS. They already sell modules like DCS world for their core train sim. I think it would be awesome knowing the train below was being manned by one of us.

 

Thoughts opinions? Before the hate train starts, no pun intended, I am not asking ED or any current third party to drop what they are doing and try something new. I know there will be people saying don't focus on that, just keep pushing planes and helps out. This is DCS "WORLD". I would like to see more of that world controlled by us and there is a lot of talent out there to help that happen. Let me know what you think gents

[cichlidfan]

Perhaps, when there are no bugs left to fix.

[Paradox]

I guess I like the idea of it but I don't think I would buy it. Maybe as a novelty

[Devil 505]

Here is a good demo of what the module is capable of and how technical it is. I think it could really flesh out DCS world.

[Cibit]

If you want to drive a train while people shoot you feel free:megalol:

[norbot]

My personal opinion is: People who want to drive trains use train-simulators, those who want to fly use flight-simulators. Next step would be to implement drivable ships, submarines, cars and space-ships and no more time for the DCS development-teams for programming what they should - aircraft.

 

Also, like others here said, I can't imagine it being fun to ride in a train while several aircraft attack you. Your only possibility is move up and down the track. AAA is not very effective, if the pilots can just drop their bombs on the track ahead of the train. Mission failed and over. :smilewink:

[David OC]

Well, while we are here and RAZBAM is making the harrier with directional thrust and seeing we now have Oculus rift with hand controllers.

 

Can I have an iron man suit? DCS: Iron man...module confirmed lol.

 

Not sure how to suspend my self up to control the leg thrust yet, would look weird...Have to talk to the guy's down in the pit building section....

 

That looks comfortable...?

Edited February 19, 2017 by David OC

[Rangi]

If it was a separate 3rd party developer doing it, sure I would love this. I used to be a big trainz player and am a borderline trainspotter so take my wishes with a large dash of salt.

[cichlidfan]

Here is a good demo of what the module is capable of and how technical it is. I think it could really flesh out DCS world.

 

I have Train Simulator and I can think of 100 things, just off of the top of my head, that would 'flesh out' DCS more than that.

[Rangi]

I have Train Simulator and I can think of 100 things, just off of the top of my head, that would 'flesh out' DCS more than that.

 

True, but at least he is trying....

[David OC]

I have Train Simulator and I can think of 100 things, just off of the top of my head, that would 'flesh out' DCS more than that.

 

Totally agree,

 

Many other things to build or to polish up first before a train sim or my Iron man module idea, at least the Iron man is inline with flight and would be fun in VR, if J.A.R.V.I.S. and the fcs is done right.

[Devil 505]

Well

 

Disregard the idea gents. I could go into the thousand other ideas we have suggested to flesh out DCS. It was just suggesting something new. It amazes me how every time someone suggests a separate third party (none that are active) try something new, stones are thrown and demands are made not to redirect efforts to anything else but aircraft.

 

Many of us have said over and over, if a third party dev that wants to focuse on ground units and can create their own new content, its not taking away from the current projects or third party devs. Yet there are always those guys jumping in giving no constructive critisim what so ever. To keep it PG, I will leave it at that.

 

DCS will become legendary the day we can combine ground modules and maybe even sea modules. The backers are there and the talent is out there. What we need is a gathering of support and people with the talent ready to roll the dice. Not bash new ideas.

 

Edited February 20, 2017 by robert.clark251

[Worrazen]

I do support the idea of adding more misc, AI activity such as armed and combat-transport train could be riding the background as AIs.

 

It would enhance the realism of things-going-on-down-there, and ofcourse all of these can be used as targets even tho they aren't as important in campaign missions, it enhances the Mission Editor capabilities, you could set up AI moving cargos with trains and possibly cargo being moved with helicopters unloading/loading and other vehicles.

 

The cargos could be the high-priority vehicles, but also other misc stuff like cargos, and you'd have more types of cargos and containers and it could have ammunition boxes and if you target that and destroy it would blow up more spectacularly,

 

This would all be helpful with the dynamic campaign feature, The AI could hijack civilian trains and upgrade them to armored ones for transport or in WW2 case even for the big guns that nazi germany used.

 

But Russia has train ICBMs, it doesn't have to be functional in DCS, but just the destructible model being there makes yet another addition.

 

This ties with the whole Static Object and Destruction side of things, those two and this one are the 3 big things I think would make a lot of improvement in the replayability and the overall feel of DCS, it would raise the value of all other modules.

 

Destruction Effects overhaul is already being developed as I heard a year ago, (sound effects and variations would should also be an equal part and not just glossed over)

Edited February 20, 2017 by Worrazen

[Flagrum]

Well

 

Disregard the idea gents. I could go into the thousand other ideas we have suggested to flesh out DCS. It was just suggesting something new. It amazes me how every time someone suggests a separate third party (none that are active) try something new, stones are thrown and demands are made not to redirect efforts to anything else but aircraft.

 

Many of us have said over and over, if a third party dev that wants to focuse on ground units and can create their own new content, its not taking away from the current projects or third party devs. Yet there are always those guys jumping in giving no constructive critisim what so ever. To keep it PG, I will leave it at that.

 

DCS will become legendary the day we can combine ground modules and maybe even sea modules. The backers are there and the talent is out there. What we need is a gathering of support and people with the talent ready to roll the dice. Not bash new ideas.

 

Just because an idea is new does not automatially mean that it is a good one ... ;-)

[David OC]

Well

 

Disregard the idea gents. I could go into the thousand other ideas we have suggested to flesh out DCS. It was just suggesting something new. It amazes me how every time someone suggests a separate third party (none that are active) try something new, stones are thrown and demands are made not to redirect efforts to anything else but aircraft.

 

Many of us have said over and over, if a third party dev that wants to focuse on ground units and can create their own new content, its not taking away from the current projects or third party devs. Yet there are always those guys jumping in giving no constructive critisim what so ever. To keep it PG, I will leave it at that.

 

DCS will become legendary the day we can combine ground modules and maybe even sea modules. The backers are there and the talent is out there. What we need is a gathering of support and people with the talent ready to roll the dice. Not bash new ideas.

 

Hey, DCS is already legendary with it's level of system modeling and FM modeling (SimArt) There is no better that I've seen out there? Only one up there with systems, because of access to Boeing, they don't do weapons and weapons systems too tho.

 

Totally get where you are coming from Robert.clark251, there's just so much ED can do before thinking about this stuff.

 

Better AI

There's so many different ones too, ww2 fighters, ww2 ground, ww2 bomber, Better wingmen logic etc etc.

 

ATC

Air Traffic Control, I think we all agree things need fixing here.

 

Weapon Ballistics

Well this has been kicked to death on the forums here, plus weapon FM's can all be updated and tweaked across the board, how many weapons is that potentially?

 

Damage Modeling

This looks like it will be updated for ww2 first, the new Damage Modeling can be applied to all the models across the board, many many units this could be adapted to in DCS...

 

Weather

Better clouds, nice to have turbulence, perhaps too much of a resource hog for this sim perhaps?

 

New Maps

New Caucasus region, Strait of Hormuz etc

Wishlist's maps

Afghanistan, Vietnam (Would be good maps and smart marketing move perhaps?)

Afghanistan works with the coming F18, harrier, A10, Huey, gazelle etc.

 

These things listed are just the main one's that I'm guessing will be worked on first?

 

DCS is a sand box simulator, the resources have to be manged well because DCS doesn't fake things, they happen all in real time.

All this takes up precious resources and I'm sure you know when you make to large of a battle it really strains the PC.

 

Merge DCS 2.5 and let the polishing begin..........

DCS is already unbelievable, once the merge and just some of this is done it will be next level unbelievable, now where is my F18, VR and carrier ops.

Edited February 20, 2017 by David OC

[NeilWillis]

I was under the impression that DCS Lawnmower was to be a thing too?

 

The spin offs would be amazing with the possibility of stuff like leaf blowers, lawn mower racing, edging shears, real quality stuff IMHO.

 

Don't even start me on DCS Greenhouse - though of course a bomb even close by would mean a whole new set of glazing. But DCS Tomato plant, DCS Aubergine, DCS Cucumber - wow!

 

I'm all for trains, and lawnmowers!

 

:music_whistling::music_whistling: :music_whistling:

[David OC]

I was under the impression that DCS Lawnmower was to be a thing too?

 

The spin offs would be amazing with the possibility of stuff like leaf blowers, lawn mower racing, edging shears, real quality stuff IMHO.

 

Don't even start me on DCS Greenhouse - though of course a bomb even close by would mean a whole new set of glazing. But DCS Tomato plant, DCS Aubergine, DCS Cucumber - wow!

 

I'm all for trains, and lawnmowers!

 

:music_whistling::music_whistling: :music_whistling:

 

 

 

DCS: Farming simulator confined! Hey hasn't that been done already?

 

Man I would hate to get A10 GAU-8 Avenger strafed on a tractor while plowing my field...

 

OK enough already, try and be professional, try and be professional....lol

 

Sorry robert.clark251, everyone's behaving badly.....

[probad]

i dont disagree that expanding the environment is to the benefit of the game experience, but such emphasis on trains seems like a serious mis-prioritization from both a coding and client perspective.

 

id much rather see processing power be put into more detailed atmospheric modelling instead of train physics for example.

Edited February 20, 2017 by probad

[Worrazen]

But DCS Tomato plant, DCS Aubergine, DCS Cucumber - wow!

 

One of the things on my core list is the static/background misc strucures and facilities, it would make DCS look more rich, there's really not much of destructible civilian facilities yet, aside from some watchtowers and really plain living houses.

 

Oil refinery :)

Edited February 20, 2017 by Worrazen

[Worrazen]

id much rather see processing power be put into more detailed atmospheric modelling instead of train physics for example.

 

I wish to think the OP was more sarcastic about the "module" part, I think the train idea could be quickly done by simply using civilian traffic, which it probably already is for the WW2 as we see the pictures, but I'd like to see trains in Nevada and Caucasus too.

[michelip]

Robert's idea should not be dismissed lightly. Look how D.C.S. has been improved by Combined Arms vehicles, and they are not aircraft. Being able to control any ground vehicle that might be of military significance is, surely, relevant. Let's broaden our minds. For now I would be happy with well modelled AI trains that could be programmed in Mission Ed.