Jump to content

Update - Checking interest on DCS: IADS (Integrated Air Defense Network) - Part 2


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, QuiGon said:

I'm just a bit worried about the performance impact of all those IADS computations.

I don't think it'd be unreasonable to have there be a "Sim" version and a "Game" version like there is for so many other modules. That way if your system's CPU isn't beefy enough to run all those calculations in real time then you can run the stripped down game version to be a bit more system friendly.

 

That being said though, if this actually happens, it'll most likely be after Vulcan is implemented so DCS would have multi-core support at that point anyway.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it going to affect multiplayer servers?

 

What about players who decide not to buy this module, when mission/server uses it?

 

EDIT: now I have read the old post from August, which seems to clarify it to some degree.


Edited by veenee

So many modules, so little time...

 

www.mikphotography.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

SEAD will be more difficult,i think i will be shooted down

通过我的 V1955A 上的 Tapatalk发言

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

A-10C Warthog,Flaming Cliffs 3,F-16C VIPER,F/A-18C HORNET,Super Carrier,AV-8B Night Attack V/STOL,Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight,Black Shark 2,SA342 Gazelle,UH-1H Huey,Persian Gulf Map,Combined Arms

 

Intel i5-7500| Colorful iGame GeForce RTX 2070 AD Special OC GDDR6 8G | Kingston FURY 32g DDR4 3200MHZ | MSI Z170A-PRO | Plextor M9PeG 1T SSD M.2 | ST 8T HDD 7200RPM | AOC 2790PQU 27'' 4K |Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog PC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Between this and the new F-18 jammer implementation, it seems DCS is moving towards a decent modeling of EW (as much as it can be modeled realistically yet not treading on sensitive secrets).

This is especially important as we get "newer" modules. You can somehow get away with a crude depiction of ECM and such when flying 50s or even 60s era planes, but when you get into the 90s forward... 

  • Like 3

Ryzen 3600X - RTX 2080 - 32 GB Ram - DCS on SSD.

DCS Modules : M2K-C, F18-C, FW-190D, Huey, Gazelle, Black Shark, Mig-15, all maps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have questionable opinion about what is going to be part of the DCS and what is part of the module itself. Like "Real-time telemetry with realistic delays" is like that will the DCS maintain capability like the current one where it is instantly known status, but the module itself has realistic delays, inaccuracies (position, fade in and out, ECM, chaff etc) that will make it more challenging to find something?

 

As well I don't recall discussions yet been about ED part to improve the SAM physics and capabilities, like we would finally drop the artificial engagement ranges and support even launches past the maximum ranges if the operator so wish (I could see this on the module side itself to make these decisions with "Global and local control options (role dependent") but the DCS side would be more strict to automatically calculated parameters depending target etc.

 

Fixing the guidance and targeting systems logic and functions I see only be part of DCS as it should be for the AI as well. So no more fooling missiles by diving toward ground as no system would drive the missile below horizon as systems knows that no pilot would dive on ground to save themselves. Same way avoid wrong self-destructing missiles because target is just about to fly outside of the engagement zone regardless what is missile kinematic capabilities intercept the target.

 

I hope this module could come true, as we need major changes to air defense systems functions and capabilities that will do nothing else than cause nightmares for virtual pilots.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still interested and it's one step closer to player controlled, study level SAM system model

  • Like 1

Intel 5820k | Asus X-99A | Crucial 16GB | Powercolor Devil RX580 8GB | Win 10 x64 | Oculus Rift | https://gallery.ksotov.co.uk

Patiently waiting for: DCS: Panavia Tornado, DCS: SA-2 Guideline, DCS: SA-3 Goa, DCS: S-300 Grumble

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, QuiGon said:

I'm just a bit worried about the performance impact of all those IADS computations.

Yup, this will probably need a properly tuned Vulkan implementation prior to adding this module, where ED can assess if there's enough performance headroom available. Or perhaps there could be a dedicated core/thread for the IADS implementation?

 

All this is quite exciting! 🤩

  • Like 1
Spoiler

Ryzen 9 5900X | 64GB G.Skill TridentZ 3600MHz CL16 | Gigabyte RX6900XT | ASUS ROG Strix X570-E GAMING | Samsung 960Pro NVMe 1TB | HP Reverb G2
Pro Flight Trainer Puma | TM Warthog (with custom spring, 10 cm extension, custom TDC, replacement pinky switch) on Wheelstand Pro | TPR rudder pedals

My in-game DCS settings (PD 1.0 SteamSS 76%):

EduSYaK.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This will fragment multiplayer environment so badly you might as well call it a subscription fee for multiplayer lol. It's a complete rewrite of core sensor functionality in DCS but behind a paywall, how is this a good idea? Are we completely done with idea of multiplayer compatibility?


I'd be all for it if it makes aircraft modules more expensive to compensate, this on the other hand will either not be used in MP at all, or will destroy multiplayer. There's no way this can be made compatible in MP for people without it. Unless the new sensor implementation is included in core, but since it's supposed to be the primary feature I don't know how that could work. The MP is already fragmented enough after supercarrier, with some servers electing to put all carrier ops behind a paywall after they were freely available to all users before. This would completely cut many servers off.

 

Also if you want to do research on user opinions this place is probably not the best source of feedback.

  • Confused 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, m4ti140 said:

This will fragment multiplayer environment so badly you might as well call it a subscription fee for multiplayer lol. It's a complete rewrite of core sensor functionality in DCS but behind a paywall, how is this a good idea? Are we completely done with idea of multiplayer compatibility?


I'd be all for it if it makes aircraft modules more expensive to compensate, this on the other hand will either not be used in MP at all, or will destroy multiplayer. There's no way this can be made compatible in MP for people without it. Unless the new sensor implementation is included in core, but since it's supposed to be the primary feature I don't know how that could work. The MP is already fragmented enough after supercarrier, with some servers electing to put all carrier ops behind a paywall after they were freely available to all users before. This would completely cut many servers off.

 

Also if you want to do research on user opinions this place is probably not the best source of feedback.

I think you're misreading the first post.  What this sounds like to me is that the ability to place an IADS with advanced behavior will be a core part of the game available to everyone, however advanced player-control of the IADS including access to sensor data will be behind a paywall.  In my mind im thinking something like CA, where module owners could slot into the IADS player slot and act as SAM commanders or GCI with access to electronic sensor data; otherwise the IADS is AI-controlled.  I'm totally fine with this, and I don't see how this would affect multiplayer at all.  Some clarification from ED or the module developer on the differences between the paid and free additions to the game and the effect on multiplayer would be appreciated.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, KingKenny04 said:

I think you're misreading the first post.  What this sounds like to me is that the ability to place an IADS with advanced behavior will be a core part of the game available to everyone, however advanced player-control of the IADS including access to sensor data will be behind a paywall.  In my mind im thinking something like CA, where module owners could slot into the IADS player slot and act as SAM commanders or GCI with access to electronic sensor data; otherwise the IADS is AI-controlled.  I'm totally fine with this, and I don't see how this would affect multiplayer at all.  Some clarification from ED or the module developer on the differences between the paid and free additions to the game and the effect on multiplayer would be appreciated.

I hope that's what it would work like, but I somehow doubt it, since the "free" portion is where most of the dev time would go. If it works like CA then yes, it would be fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KingKenny04 said:

I think you're misreading the first post.  What this sounds like to me is that the ability to place an IADS with advanced behavior will be a core part of the game available to everyone, however advanced player-control of the IADS including access to sensor data will be behind a paywall.  In my mind im thinking something like CA, where module owners could slot into the IADS player slot and act as SAM commanders or GCI with access to electronic sensor data; otherwise the IADS is AI-controlled.  I'm totally fine with this, and I don't see how this would affect multiplayer at all.  Some clarification from ED or the module developer on the differences between the paid and free additions to the game and the effect on multiplayer would be appreciated.

 

That's what I think would be the best option, and work best for everyone. The base functionality of whatever they end up doing with IADS (to steal from Skynet, connecting to power sources, integrating the radar networks, setting up point-defense for larger SAM sites, having SAM sites shutdown to avoid attack and being targeted) would be a core gameplay improvement. Regardless of purchasing the IADS module, you would still benefit from the core gameplay improvements that would make the air defenses much more dangerous to go up against, and more realistic in their operations. 

 

Then you could include functionality to let people manually control networks, some sort of SAM Simulator for DCS. Maybe give the person in charge the ability to draw from existing squadrons at airbases and spawn interceptor flights from an airbase using their radar terminal from AWACS or the SAM sites. Could really create a ton of fun for online play. In terms of what's included with Combined Arms, it seems like it would be something that could be included with that. I don't know how feasible that is for ED, but it seems like merging an IADS development in Combined Arms would do a lot to draw new people, and add exciting features that existing CA users would likely enjoy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@m4ti140 I too think you're misreading this a bit. I think ED is quite aware of how small the MP community is compared to other games and wouldn't let this happen since it indeed would fragment it way too much. Looking at what NineLine wrote in the OP really supports that:

 

Quote

 

What we can tell you so far is that the IADS simulation module will include some of the following features, all part of the DCS core:

  • Addition of IADS building tools to the Mission Editor
  • IADS generator (automatic and manual)
  • Logistics component (replenishment of fuel and ammunition)
  • New unit templates
  • New types of trigger zones: Lines (borders), Circles (including lower/upper altitude boundaries), Polygons (including lower/upper altitude boundaries)
  • New drawing tools

 

 

The way i read it is (and most others i guess), that those things will be in for everybody for free as DCS core features.

  • Like 2

bts_100.jpg.22eae5ddd2a463fc09375990ad043870.jpg

 

Hardware: MSI B450 Gaming Plus MAX | Ryzen 5 3600X (6*3.8 Ghz) | 16 GB RAM | MSI Radeon RX5700 | Samsung SSD 860 QVO 1TB | Win 10 (64-bit) TM Warthog HOTAS, MFD and rudder pedals, TrackIR5

Wishlist:  Northern Germany/Baltic Sea theater | DCS level Su-25A or SM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...