Easy AAR poll

[draconus]

So to end the long discussion from here:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=275326

 

Let's see how many of you want it badly.

 

To make clear the mode in question would be optional.

 

Edit: ED stance is currently "no plans"

 

Edited March 28, 2021 by draconus

[Flyer0001]

Nice job. I did not know this sort of thing existed on a forum.

[SharpeXB]

No, because Unlimited Fuel is already available as a game aid.

[=Mac=]

No because (1) DCS is not a game, (2) if you can't AAR, then cheat by making it unlimited fuel, (3) no because it pushes the novice player to LEARN difficult things.

[Fri13]

This feature is not for everyone, nor default. It would be optional setting in mission editor or game settings for specific aircraft/client/slot, specific tanker, for all etc. Just like allowing easy radio, rudder trimmers, weapons laser codes programming inside cockpit etc.

 

It is not away from anyone who want to do it by all itself, they can if they don't enable it.

 

As it was made clear in the discussion thread, unlimited fuel is not same thing.

 

1) unlimited fuel means you have 100% fuel all the time. So it changes your weapons loadout and your flight performance dramatically.

 

2) If the unlimited fuel mode would be "no fuel consumption", it could be said to be similar as one can load aircraft with 12% fuel and fly forever, but again changes to weapons loadout and flight performance or is not same thing.

 

3) one might want to train air refueling with assistance for starters, unlimited fuel or full challenge does not help there.

 

4) one might want to fly missions that requires air refueling, performing the refueling and continue missions with new amount of fuel that gets consumed.

 

5) this can be used to allow different skill levels or hardware users fly together, each having different assistance levels if at all...

[TheGuardian]

It is what it is man. AAR isn't supposed to be easy. As others have said Unlimited Fuel is already an option, so why add another. Can't really complain about wanting the added realism of not having unlimited fuel but not be completely realistic and want "easy" AAR.

[TheGuardian]

This feature is not for everyone, nor default. It would be optional setting in mission editor or game settings for specific aircraft/client/slot, specific tanker, for all etc. Just like allowing easy radio, rudder trimmers, weapons laser codes programming inside cockpit etc.

 

It is not away from anyone who want to do it by all itself, they can if they don't enable it.

 

As it was made clear in the discussion thread, unlimited fuel is not same thing.

 

1) unlimited fuel means you have 100% fuel all the time. So it changes your weapons loadout and your flight performance dramatically.

 

2) If the unlimited fuel mode would be "no fuel consumption", it could be said to be similar as one can load aircraft with 12% fuel and fly forever, but again changes to weapons loadout and flight performance or is not same thing.

 

3) one might want to train air refueling with assistance for starters, unlimited fuel or full challenge does not help there.

 

4) one might want to fly missions that requires air refueling, performing the refueling and continue missions with new amount of fuel that gets consumed.

 

5) this can be used to allow different skill levels or hardware users fly together, each having different assistance levels if at all...

 

again, anyone can get better at AAR. I sucked for like three months at it and it still kicks my butt from time to time, but I can get gas when i need it. I still enjoy the challenge of it. As far as #4 goes, dude you either get with the sim, or go play arcade mode. #5 SKILL.......SKILL........skill requires practice and you actually have to practice at the skill you want to master. How does creating an "EASY MODE" promote practice? The individual will never want to practice without easy mode, therefore will never get better. I wouldn't want to fly with someone who doesn't want to get better at different aspects of flight. Just my opinion.

[Bearfoot]

Sure ...

 

But also let's have easy/auto BFM, BVR, take-off, landing, carrier recovery, coordinated turns, and, why not, straighjt-and-level flight (<- someone actually asked for this too!).

 

Better yet, just have an option for people to get a first-person view in the cockpit of an AI aircraft where they can push/pull controls and press buttons so they can pretend to be playing this game but really the AI does everything for them.

[SharpeXB]

1) unlimited fuel means you have 100% fuel all the time. So it changes your weapons loadout and your flight performance dramatically.

Actually if you set Unlimited Fuel you can still go to the Mission Editor and change your loadout to less than 100%.

[vigilante87]

No because (1) DCS is not a game

 

Here we go again.....

 

But to answer the question, no I don't think there should be an simpler AAR. Doesn't the SU-33 already have something like that anyways?

[Supmua]

Yes. I do not view this as anything different from easy radio, auto start, etc.

 

DCS *is* a game, pretend play for adults at the highest order, as far as I’m concerned.

[Bearfoot]

Yes. I do not view this as anything different from easy radio, auto start, etc.

 

DCS *is* a game, pretend play for adults at the highest order, as far as I’m concerned.

 

Easy radio / auto start etc. are about systems management.

 

AAR is about flying.

 

If easy AAR, why not easy BVR? Easy BFM? Easy coordinated turns? Easy formation flying? Why should easy AAR take precedence over easy BVR or BFM? Because some find one boring and the other fun?

[epoch]

No because (1) DCS is not a game,

 

To quote Eagle Dynamics directly:

 

Digital Combat Simulator World (DCS World) 2.5 is a free-to-play digital battlefield game.

 

Source.

 

So yeah, it's a game.

 

Voted yes. Wouldn't want to use it myself, but if it makes people happy and more engaged then it's all good.

[Fri13]

Actually if you set Unlimited Fuel you can still go to the Mission Editor and change your loadout to less than 100%.

 

It still is 100%

 

You can't get it less than 100% AFAIK.

 

Edit: this is from manual

 

UNLIMITED FUEL. When enabled, fuel will not deplete from your aircraft. Note that you will always have 100% fuel when this is selected.[/Quote]

 

Edit2:

 

Simply put. Anyone who is against this, doesn't want beginners to learn air refueling with adjustable assistance until they can. They do not want beginners to learn and fly the doctrine that includes refueling in air, but they recommend to them use the cheat instead a simple assistance. And they do not want beginners then learn to fly by constantly changing aircraft performance and time limits because changing fuel amount, so they want them to learn to fly always with 100% fuel and 100% fuel weight.

Because they want easier targets that can't maneuver or accelerate so well because all they are in full fuel.

That they wouldn't learn how to do normal missions or even carrier landing procedures where after few bolting you need to get back to refueling etc....

 

They say that "get good or go away" and how is that unlimited fuel ever going to help them to learn refueling when they don't need to at all.

 

It is elitism "I want everyone have most difficult learning time, I started that way too!" or fear "I don't want DCS to be available for everyone as otherwise it might turn to be simplified in future".

 

But never would a such feature take away anything from those people who are against it.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Fri13

[Mars Exulte]

No because (1) DCS is not a game

 

I voted no, but this is still a stupid statement. Yes, it's a game. It's electronic entertainment and while a high quality simulation of flight, unlike PROFESSIONAL SOFTWARE, you cannot log your hours in it in any shape form or fashion. Why? Because it's a game. Sorry buddy, you're not a fighter pilot, and nobody's going to let you near one.

[SharpeXB]

It still is 100%

 

You can't get it less than 100% AFAIK.

 

Edit: this is from manual

Just tried it out. It works. If 100% fuel was forced on, indeed some aircraft like the P-51D would be severely affected. The manual is correct that you’ll have 100% fuel, but you can change that in the editor.

[Gladman]

I can AAR easily enough and it is a skill that gives back, however, I voted yes because as long as it can be turned off at the server level, it might just allow more people to enjoy the game. More people equals more revenue for ED, which in turn bring more content for me.

[AG-51_Razor]

I voted Yes. I would not use it because I enjoy the challenge of "doing it the HARD way!" :megalol: However, I wouldn't begrudge anyone else of getting it done any way they can. For all of you Realism enforcers out there, take a look at the Options section of the GUI (which I believe stands for Game User Interface) and go to the GAMEPLAY page, where you will find all sorts of options that affect the way one would interact with this game. Options for labels, views, G tolerance, immortality, wake turbulance, etc.etc.etc.

 

 

Why would ANYBODY in this community vote against an option that obviously many folks would like to have?? It's not like you would be forced to use it. As a host you would most likely be able to not allow the clients to use it. I mean after all, it is your sand box and by God, EVERYONE is going to play it the.....er fly it the way you want them to! Sheeesh!! :doh:

[Sandman1330]

I voted Yes. I would not use it because I enjoy the challenge of "doing it the HARD way!" :megalol: However, I wouldn't begrudge anyone else of getting it done any way they can. For all of you Realism enforcers out there, take a look at the Options section of the GUI (which I believe stands for Game User Interface) and go to the GAMEPLAY page, where you will find all sorts of options that affect the way one would interact with this game. Options for labels, views, G tolerance, immortality, wake turbulance, etc.etc.etc.

 

 

Why would ANYBODY in this community vote against an option that obviously many folks would like to have?? It's not like you would be forced to use it. As a host you would most likely be able to not allow the clients to use it. I mean after all, it is your sand box and by God, EVERYONE is going to play it the.....er fly it the way you want them to! Sheeesh!! :doh:

 

This.

 

I can AAR easily enough and it is a skill that gives back, however, I voted yes because as long as it can be turned off at the server level, it might just allow more people to enjoy the game. More people equals more revenue for ED, which in turn bring more content for me.

 

And this.

 

I have no problem doing AAR in any airframe, including the Hornet (super easy), tomcat, viper, harrier... but I have the means to invest in quality hardware, including a good HOTAS and VR. Some folks I play online with don’t even have TrackIR, and a low end HOTAS. I spend a lot of time in right observation waiting for them and watching them get frustrated, so if it improves their gameplay, I’m happy.

 

More people playing = more revenue and resources for ED = more resources to improve other parts of the sim. I see it as a short term loss for long term investment. If we make it so “exclusive”, we won’t have a sim anymore and ED will go the way of every other simulator company.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Sandman1330

[Bearfoot]

I voted Yes. I would not use it because I enjoy the challenge of "doing it the HARD way!" :megalol: However, I wouldn't begrudge anyone else of getting it done any way they can. For all of you Realism enforcers out there, take a look at the Options section of the GUI (which I believe stands for Game User Interface) and go to the GAMEPLAY page, where you will find all sorts of options that affect the way one would interact with this game. Options for labels, views, G tolerance, immortality, wake turbulance, etc.etc.etc.

 

 

Why would ANYBODY in this community vote against an option that obviously many folks would like to have?? It's not like you would be forced to use it. As a host you would most likely be able to not allow the clients to use it. I mean after all, it is your sand box and by God, EVERYONE is going to play it the.....er fly it the way you want them to! Sheeesh!! :doh:

 

Hi Razor, I agree completely that this should be enjoyed by each indivdidual in whatever way they see fit in the privacy of their own home :) ! I don't think the vote means very much in terms of ED decisions, but in answer to why someone would vote no --- because this would represent an investment of developer resource, effort, and time that should be better spent elsewhere. Like, for e.g., better AI, optimization of performance, bug-fixing, module-completion, better mission generation, dynamic campaign etc.

[Fri13]

Just tried it out. It works. If 100% fuel was forced on, indeed some aircraft like the P-51D would be severely affected. The manual is correct that you’ll have 100% fuel, but you can change that in the editor.

 

I have done that, the indicators show adjusted but fuel is still 100%.

 

That has been as well explained here that once you are in unlimited fuel, your adjustment doesn't matter.

[SharpeXB]

I have done that, the indicators show adjusted but fuel is still 100%.

 

That has been as well explained here that once you are in unlimited fuel, your adjustment doesn't matter.

You can change it in the Mission Planner before starting the flight.

Edited July 7, 2020 by SharpeXB

[Madgunner]

Absolutely not. In fact, I think it's something they should perfect (communications, probe physics ...), and that would make air refueling an even more demanding maneuver.

[Mars Exulte]

@Razor

The poll is ''do YOU want'' not ''do you think SOMEBODY ELSE wants''. It's also irrelevant if ''some'' want, if a large portion won't use. I.E. the ''breathalyzer'' thread. Would ''some'' use it? Probably. Would enough use it is the issue.

 

Would lots of people use easy AAR? That's the purpose of this poll. So far it's 2 to 1 against, even with many of the supporters being self professed ''I wouldn't use it myself'' types. End result : most people of the sample so far would not use it.

 

Note : any addition requires time and resources

[sirrah]

Are we seriously going to do this thread all over again? :doh:

 

For crying out loud, at least merge these two threads....