Jump to content

Armor (Tank) modules revisited


High Fidelity/Accurate Armor (Tank) modules for DCS world  

25 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like to see Tank or other Armor modules created by ED or Third Party Devs?

    • Yes
      16
    • No
      9


Recommended Posts

I know the topic has been brought up in the past, but I thought I would reignite it again with DCS WW2 ramping up.  ED has said in recent past that their military customers had come to them asking if it was possible to create a high fidelity armor module like their aircraft.  To the best of my recollection, they said it was being taken under advisement and they would like to work on one.  YEARS ago they were talking about an M1A but it went cold and dark, never to be spoken about again.

I think the best intro into tanks would be WW2 with so many variations being available for the time periods we have for our current maps.  The video below shows just how fun it could be in DCS.  I know this is IL2's rendition of tank battles, but for the accuracy and realism I am looking for, no one can do it better than ED in my own opinion.  With the announcement of a cargo plane coming, Wags video this week on the free draw tool in the mission editor,  and the Dynamic Campaign getting closer to release it only seems logical we will want armor modules.  Also the announcement today of the human motion model with intelligent behavior is another massive red flag of what is coming down the road.  What are your opinions/thoughts?  

 

The poll above is to get an idea of who would be interested in taking the fight to the ground.  This is Digital Combat Simulator after all.

 

 


Edited by Devil 505
Forgot to add video
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solid yes from me, though there would be a fair amount of work ahead.

If the other WW2 flight sim can do it, then I don't see why we can't, even if it mandated a dedicated map with a more confined area (current maps certainly get close, but there's still a bit of stuff missing to be on par with the other one).


Edited by Northstar98
  • Like 2

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV-2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, CA, NS430, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/bG9bBc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't even looked at a cockpit in the past 2 weeks not because of a lack of interest, but because I started playing around with armored vehicles in the ME again. There is so much potential with CA, and that isn't saying anything negative about the really amazing logic/features that are already there. The more time I spend with it, the more I am pleasantly surprised at just how much work ED has already put into the ground war part of DCS.

I am not really good with the ME so progress has been slow, but I have been experimenting the past two weeks setting up armored battle missions with AI planes hammering both sides. A more capable infantry would definitely be welcome.

For both the WWII and helicopter crowd that get down low into the map detail, it is going to be a game changer IMO!

So yeah, what ever you do Eagle Dynamics don't stop developing planes/jets/helicopters/maps, but keep the tech packs and ground war coming!:clap_2:   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Devil 505 said:

I know the topic has been brought up in the past, but I thought I would reignite it again with DCS WW2 ramping up.  ED has said in recent past that their military customers had come to them asking if it was possible to create a high fidelity armor module like their aircraft.  To the best of my recollection, they said it was being taken under advisement and they would like to work on one.  YEARS ago they were talking about an M1A but it went cold and dark, never to be spoken about again.

I think the best intro into tanks would be WW2 with so many variations being available for the time periods we have for our current maps.  The video below shows just how fun it could be in DCS.  I know this is IL2's rendition of tank battles, but for the accuracy and realism I am looking for, no one can do it better than ED in my own opinion.  With the announcement of a cargo plane coming, Wags video this week on the free draw tool in the mission editor,  and the Dynamic Campaign getting closer to release it only seems logical we will want armor modules.  Also the announcement today of the human motion model with intelligent behavior is another massive red flag of what is coming down the road.  What are your opinions/thoughts?  

 

The poll above is to get an idea of who would be interested in taking the fight to the ground.  This is Digital Combat Simulator after all.

 

 

 

Grim reapers sure have alot of fun..

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at how much fun wingman and me have as a vehicle crew in Squad, combined with how much we love DCS: high fidelity tank module would be a no-brainer. ED gib StuG-III G Schürze rn!

A good range of those tank also would not only be WWII relevant. Looking at AIW or 6DW for example, lots of WWII gear there.

16 hours ago, Mogster said:

Realise this sounds negative but I’d rather the focus remained on aircraft. Development pace is already slow enough and there’s little enough focus (none?) as is.

Land based modules would actually open DCS for 3rd party developers that did not specialize in aircraft. So this would not necessarily slow down anything else.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

image.png

Hardware: MSI B450 Gaming Plus MAX | Ryzen 5 3600X (6*3.8 Ghz) | 32 GB RAM | MSI Radeon RX5700 | Samsung SSD 860 QVO 1TB | DCS dedicated @ WD Blue 500 GB SSD | Win 10 (64-bit) | TM Warthog HOTAS, MFD and rudder pedals, TrackIR5

Wishlist:  Northern Germany/Baltic Sea theater | Full Fidelity Su-25A | Asset packs (80s Iran, Lebanon 1982, Syria 2011+ factions) | Persistent KB shortcuts | Proper coalitions system |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Desert Fox said:

Looking at how much fun wingman and me have as a vehicle crew in Squad, combined with how much we love DCS: high fidelity tank module would be a no-brainer. ED gib StuG-III G Schürze rn!

A good range of those tank also would not only be WWII relevant. Looking at AIW or 6DW for example, lots of WWII gear there.

Land based modules would actually open DCS for 3rd party developers that did not specialize in aircraft. So this would not necessarily slow down anything else.

Whats that game like? Its been on my wishlist for a long time..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Desert Fox said:

Looking at how much fun wingman and me have as a vehicle crew in Squad, combined with how much we love DCS: high fidelity tank module would be a no-brainer. ED gib StuG-III G Schürze rn!

A good range of those tank also would not only be WWII relevant. Looking at AIW or 6DW for example, lots of WWII gear there.

Land based modules would actually open DCS for 3rd party developers that did not specialize in aircraft. So this would not necessarily slow down anything else.

+1

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Realise this sounds negative but I’d rather the focus remained on aircraft. Development pace is already slow enough and there’s little enough focus (none?) as is.
Pretty sure a dedicated brand new tank department wouldn't interfere with any airframe.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, a tank module at this point would make very little sense unless ED greatly expanded the ground combat aspects of DCS. We would need new maps, AI capabilities, weapon and damage modeling... the list goes on. So the argument that it would occupy ED resources is valid, regardless of who made the actual tanks. And even if ED went to all this trouble, how much would the air combat and ground combat players actually interact once the novelty wore off? In the end tanks are just targets for attack aircraft with very limited abilities to fight back.

IMHO the class of ground units that would make far more sense in DCS are (both modern and WW2 era) air defense units. The limitations of ground combat simulation in DCS would be largely irrelevant and they would by design interact with the existing modules and playerbase.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, a tank module at this point would make very little sense unless ED greatly expanded the ground combat aspects of DCS. We would need new maps, AI capabilities, weapon and damage modeling... the list goes on. So the argument that it would occupy ED resources is valid, regardless of who made the actual tanks. And even if ED went to all this trouble, how much would the air combat and ground combat players actually interact once the novelty wore off? In the end tanks are just targets for attack aircraft with very limited abilities to fight back.
IMHO the class of ground units that would make far more sense in DCS are (both modern and WW2 era) air defense units. The limitations of ground combat simulation in DCS would be largely irrelevant and they would by design interact with the existing modules and playerbase.
Oh, I agree with a lot of what you write. But isn't it all an incentive for ED to have a dedicated "ground" team then?
I'm pretty sure this could benefit both ground/helicopters and fast flyers.
DCS World. That's the name of the game. I'm pretty sure this will come later anyway, so why not sooner. A lot of the fast flyers have been asking for a better ground war anyway.
I just can't see any negative implementations of this. In a certain other WWII SIM, it seems like a lot of fun to hide in the trees from fighters.
Correctly done in whatever time period, I will think this could work.
My glass is always full, enjoy your Saturday, cheers!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really it’s another of those polls where people are going to vote yes… because there’s no reason not to…

A Better poll would be to ask if the community would prefer ground combat modules or …. something else…. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Oh, I agree with a lot of what you write. But isn't it all an incentive for ED to have a dedicated "ground" team then?
I'm pretty sure this could benefit both ground/helicopters and fast flyers. emoji4.png
DCS World. That's the name of the game. I'm pretty sure this will come later anyway, so why not sooner. A lot of the fast flyers have been asking for a better ground war anyway. emoji6.png
I just can't see any negative implementations of this. In a certain other WWII SIM, it seems like a lot of fun to hide in the trees from fighters.
Correctly done in whatever time period, I will think this could work.
My glass is always full, enjoy your Saturday, cheers! emoji1.png

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

ED is working on all of this already and for quite some time: some ground AI improvements coming soon (insurgent infantry already got new behavior) and more will likely come with dynamic campaign later. WWII aircraft damage model is live already with modern jets following, ground unit damage models are planned to be done next. Current gen maps like Syria or Channel map definitely have enough detail for vehicle combat.
See zero reason why an additional 3rd party should or could not make a high fidelity vehicle reality in 3-5 years. It's not like such would be started tomorrow and be ready in two weeks. This is a realistic time frame i think when planning would start this year. Prerequisites would be live in DCS 3.5 at this time.

ED themselves quite obviously would not have the additional capacity for such, no need to argue here.

  • Like 2

image.png

Hardware: MSI B450 Gaming Plus MAX | Ryzen 5 3600X (6*3.8 Ghz) | 32 GB RAM | MSI Radeon RX5700 | Samsung SSD 860 QVO 1TB | DCS dedicated @ WD Blue 500 GB SSD | Win 10 (64-bit) | TM Warthog HOTAS, MFD and rudder pedals, TrackIR5

Wishlist:  Northern Germany/Baltic Sea theater | Full Fidelity Su-25A | Asset packs (80s Iran, Lebanon 1982, Syria 2011+ factions) | Persistent KB shortcuts | Proper coalitions system |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ED is working on all of this already and for quite some time: some ground AI improvements coming soon (insurgent infantry already got new behavior) and more will likely come with dynamic campaign later. WWII aircraft damage model is live already with modern jets following, ground unit damage models are planned to be done next. Current gen maps like Syria or Channel map definitely have enough detail for vehicle combat.
See zero reason why an additional 3rd party should or could not make a high fidelity vehicle reality in 3-5 years. It's not like such would be started tomorrow and be ready in two weeks. This is a realistic time frame i think when planning would start this year. Prerequisites would be live in DCS 3.5 at this time.
ED themselves quite obviously would not have the additional capacity for such, no need to argue here.
!!!!!!
I was searching for something, and because I'm lazy, I ended up with watching a six year old video. I have actually, watched that video before, probably about three years ago. It didn't look too dated at that time. But today !!!
DCS is a living thing, that for sure!!!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. DCS in 2025 will be a completely different beast than what we got today. So much amazing stuff and fundamental game changers "right at the door step" for the next two years or so to be released. Multi-threading/Vulkan for example will change performance drastically and open the door for a lot of features yet to be too demanding. Especially AI will profit from this. Also server performance/possible player count, which would be important for reasonable MP ground play. Also things like sonar for naval gameplay will become more likely due to the high performance cost they come with.

If ED is clever, they settle the ground right now to expand into ground and naval gameplay established until 2030. Their traditional markets start to be fed, at some point people won't buy their 25th jet or 15th warbird anymore. (Most bite off too much with a second one already tbh 😄). That's why we have the year of helicopters: fixed wing is quite saturated by now. Flight sims is a niche (albeit being quite popular right now) where you can not generate new customers out of thin air and without limits. At some point you've got to jump off the plate, not just look beyond it's limits.

Ground and naval is a whole new customer group to be served (overlapping with aviationists naturally to some excess ofc) and the logical next step apart from new maps and spin-offs like the IADS module or other meta-gaming. Naval is something i see further in the future since the prerequisites are not as set as with ground. But tanks... yes, absolutely realistic within a few years. Remind me 2025 if you read this in the future 😄

  • Like 4

image.png

Hardware: MSI B450 Gaming Plus MAX | Ryzen 5 3600X (6*3.8 Ghz) | 32 GB RAM | MSI Radeon RX5700 | Samsung SSD 860 QVO 1TB | DCS dedicated @ WD Blue 500 GB SSD | Win 10 (64-bit) | TM Warthog HOTAS, MFD and rudder pedals, TrackIR5

Wishlist:  Northern Germany/Baltic Sea theater | Full Fidelity Su-25A | Asset packs (80s Iran, Lebanon 1982, Syria 2011+ factions) | Persistent KB shortcuts | Proper coalitions system |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Desert Fox said:

Exactly. DCS in 2025 will be a completely different beast than what we got today. So much amazing stuff and fundamental game changers "right at the door step" for the next two years or so to be released. Multi-threading/Vulkan for example will change performance drastically and open the door for a lot of features yet to be too demanding. Especially AI will profit from this. Also server performance/possible player count, which would be important for reasonable MP ground play. Also things like sonar for naval gameplay will become more likely due to the high performance cost they come with.

If ED is clever, they settle the ground right now to expand into ground and naval gameplay established until 2030. Their traditional markets start to be fed, at some point people won't buy their 25th jet or 15th warbird anymore. (Most bite off too much with a second one already tbh 😄). That's why we have the year of helicopters: fixed wing is quite saturated by now. Flight sims is a niche (albeit being quite popular right now) where you can not generate new customers out of thin air and without limits. At some point you've got to jump off the plate, not just look beyond it's limits.

Ground and naval is a whole new customer group to be served (overlapping with aviationists naturally to some excess ofc) and the logical next step apart from new maps and spin-offs like the IADS module or other meta-gaming. Naval is something i see further in the future since the prerequisites are not as set as with ground. But tanks... yes, absolutely realistic within a few years. Remind me 2025 if you read this in the future 😄

Couldn't agree with this more because it pretty much describes me. I came to DCS looking for WWII Tanks, and stayed because of the war birds. I now own almost all of the WWII planes. And with the recent news of improved deck crew/infantry, it sounds like I will be getting into jets and helicopters sooner than originally panned. So I think it is in every ones best interest that ED works at making this the one-stop shop, because you may come for one thing and find you quite like something else just as much.

As an example, my interest is really WWII, but lately I have been exploring the 70 or so post WWII armored vehicles/MRLS/SAM systems in the game and am finding my interests expanding rapidly.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Mogster said:

Really it’s another of those polls where people are going to vote yes… because there’s no reason not to…

A Better poll would be to ask if the community would prefer ground combat modules or …. something else…. 

I do not necessarily disagree with you on this, however, it is such an open ended question, I was wanting to see who was specifically interested in Tanks/Armor.  Had I left it the way you suggested, it would have turned into one of those polls that went off on a tangent of 1000 different things people want, then an argument kicks off and ED has to close the thread.  

More or less, the reactions I have seen so far are exactly how I feel.  Seems logical this will be a progressive step in the future.  The only thing a slightly disagree with that I see often in these threads is how the armor and air units will not really work together.  This is really a subjective view point.  If played in conjunction with the upcoming dynamic campaign generator, both ground and air units will rely on each other to turn the tide of war for each side.  To suggest players will not take full advantage of communicating with aircraft/helos would really limit the players ability to successfully complete a mission.  But that is the glory of how you play DCS.  

If you have solo tank/aircraft crews on one side, red or blue, that do not communicate or work with each other, it is going to be very difficult to push the line forward.  What is air superiority without taking and holding ground from below.  However if the opposing ground force is using air support, air units are calling ground targets to the ground forces, and working together to secure an area, players will see the benefits of utilizing both together.  I am not saying there will not be times where air support is not needed and you cannot go in solo or with several friends, but I really think player ground modules will flesh out the already growing digital battlefield DCS has.

Now if you started a separate poll and people where like, I want Naval units first or operational SAM/AAA sites we could man, or anything else, I am still on board.  I think one thing that is important about these polls, even if redundant, is that ED consistently sees the customers desire to watch their product grow and keeps them informed we will always want more.  For a business, you could ask for nothing more than to see the desire of your customers ready to throw money at you because of how much they love your products.  It only fosters the desire of ED to venture down new paths. 

Look at he Cargo aircraft.  ED never had any plans to pursue it and then Anubis dropped his C-130 mod.  The crowd goes wild and now ED revaluated their stance and are developing a cargo aircraft.  I am not suggesting it is the Anubis C-130 (REALLY HOPE SO because there was an image showing the cockpit with ground radar) but we the customer help drive the company to make new products.  I highly encourage these polls to continue regardless of the topic.  We have new people coming to DCS all the time and it helps to gain their support as the business continues to grow.  Appreciate the response.  I would be interested if you started a separate poll.  I would gladly vote. 

Below are a couple great videos I found of what DCS could possibly be with ground units, but obviously at the ED fidelity level.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

But isn't it all an incentive for ED to have a dedicated "ground" team then?
I'm pretty sure this could benefit both ground/helicopters and fast flyers. emoji4.png

Well, it's always a trade-off. Consider everything that would need to be developed to create a ground combat simulation in DCS that would rival dedicated ground sims (making it worthwhile to spend $30-50 on an individual module). Now consider what else could ED accomplish with those resources in all the other areas where DCS needs work. Doing one thing always means not doing something else.

But ok. Let's focus on benefitting helicopter and ground attack aircraft players. It's the year of the helicopter after all. What would those players notice and appreciate the most? Better AI, particularly on a platoon and higher level? More realistic communication with and between ground units? Weapon and damage modeling (focused primarily on surface to air and air to surface weaponry, because this is where the interaction happens)? Honestly, from the perspective of a ground attack player, I don't really care about the fidelity of engine modeling of an individual tank, or if its gun mantlet armour thickness is accurate. I do care if the enemy troops react in a realistic and believable way to what I'm doing and if my own troops are talking to me. Since pretty much forever ground units under fire move a few dozen meters in a random direction and freeze, waiting to be killed in subsequent attacks and redfor has no communication with ground troops available to them (while the blufor JTAC is primitive at best). These are the areas that need work first. Tank modules can wait. Let's have a believable ground war when looking at it from my cockpit first.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's always a trade-off. Consider everything that would need to be developed to create a ground combat simulation in DCS that would rival dedicated ground sims (making it worthwhile to spend $30-50 on an individual module). Now consider what else could ED accomplish with those resources in all the other areas where DCS needs work. Doing one thing always means not doing something else.
But ok. Let's focus on benefitting helicopter and ground attack aircraft players. It's the year of the helicopter after all. What would those players notice and appreciate the most? Better AI, particularly on a platoon and higher level? More realistic communication with and between ground units? Weapon and damage modeling (focused primarily on surface to air and air to surface weaponry, because this is where the interaction happens)? Honestly, from the perspective of a ground attack player, I don't really care about the fidelity of engine modeling of an individual tank, or if its gun mantlet armour thickness is accurate. I do care if the enemy troops react in a realistic and believable way to what I'm doing and if my own troops are talking to me. Since pretty much forever ground units under fire move a few dozen meters in a random direction and freeze, waiting to be killed in subsequent attacks and redfor has no communication with ground troops available to them (while the blufor JTAC is primitive at best). These are the areas that need work first. Tank modules can wait. Let's have a believable ground war when looking at it from my cockpit first.
Fair points. I agree!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Fair points. I agree! emoji1303.png

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

Well, first paragraph is bs because 1) there are 3rd parties and 2) you can't just take some developer from, say, weather modelling or missile mechanics and let them build a tank. That's not how it works. If ED was starting to work on this, they most likely would hire additional devs for this which specialized in this direction.

NL had explained that quite well over here:

image.png

Second paragraph is just off-topic. This thread is not about how aviation players would benefit from this and that. It is about having full fidelity tanks and who's interested in it apart from anything air related.


Edited by Desert Fox
added NL post
  • Like 2

image.png

Hardware: MSI B450 Gaming Plus MAX | Ryzen 5 3600X (6*3.8 Ghz) | 32 GB RAM | MSI Radeon RX5700 | Samsung SSD 860 QVO 1TB | DCS dedicated @ WD Blue 500 GB SSD | Win 10 (64-bit) | TM Warthog HOTAS, MFD and rudder pedals, TrackIR5

Wishlist:  Northern Germany/Baltic Sea theater | Full Fidelity Su-25A | Asset packs (80s Iran, Lebanon 1982, Syria 2011+ factions) | Persistent KB shortcuts | Proper coalitions system |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2021 at 6:56 PM, Devil 505 said:

I think the best intro into tanks would be WW2 with so many variations being available for the time periods we have for our current maps.

Additionally here, the lack of hightec components makes development way easier probably than starting with modern tanks. There is no trouble with restricted documents and for the most part the tech is very well documented and widely available. Measurements and pictures can (relatively) easily be taken at museums. And you can take advantage of lots and lots of real combat reports to balance the module against theoretical abilities - like aircraft, vehicles usually do work out different in real combat than it was planned on the drawing board.

  • Like 2

image.png

Hardware: MSI B450 Gaming Plus MAX | Ryzen 5 3600X (6*3.8 Ghz) | 32 GB RAM | MSI Radeon RX5700 | Samsung SSD 860 QVO 1TB | DCS dedicated @ WD Blue 500 GB SSD | Win 10 (64-bit) | TM Warthog HOTAS, MFD and rudder pedals, TrackIR5

Wishlist:  Northern Germany/Baltic Sea theater | Full Fidelity Su-25A | Asset packs (80s Iran, Lebanon 1982, Syria 2011+ factions) | Persistent KB shortcuts | Proper coalitions system |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Desert Fox said:

Well, first paragraph is bs because 1) there are 3rd parties

Sure, 3rd parties can build all the tanks. After ED builds all the systems and the tools needed and probably in the process does a proof of concept module or a couple that is. But yeah, after those tiny little details are resolved, 3rd parties can do the work. And then we will be able to drive around in our perfectly recreated Shermans and deplete health bars of AI ground units that have no concept of tactics beyond dispersing randomly and freezing in place until they are all dead. Because guess what, 3rd parties aren't building core systems for DCS such as damage models and ground AI.

2 hours ago, Desert Fox said:

2) you can't just take some developer from, say, weather modelling or missile mechanics and let them build a tank. That's not how it works. If ED was starting to work on this, they most likely would hire additional devs for this which specialized in this direction.

They could also, you know, hire additional devs to work on all the stuff that DCS players have asked for for years. That's what I meant by "resources". 


Edited by lmp
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Desert Fox said:

Second paragraph is just off-topic. This thread is not about how aviation players would benefit from this and that. It is about having full fidelity tanks and who's interested in it apart from anything air related.

It is on topic, because unless you want the tanks and the planes to synergize, then you're asking for two separate games in one... for the hell of it? Why not build a new game from scratch - it'll be easier!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, lmp said:

Sure, 3rd parties can build all the tanks. After ED builds all the systems and the tools needed and probably in the process does a proof of concept module or a couple that is. But yeah, after those tiny little details are resolved, 3rd parties can do the work. And then we will be able to drive around in our perfectly recreated Shermans and deplete health bars of AI ground units that have no concept of tactics beyond dispersing randomly and freezing in place until they are all dead. Because guess what, 3rd parties aren't building core systems for DCS such as damage models and ground AI.

If you only had read the thread... core improvements and shit, you know?

23 minutes ago, lmp said:

They could also, you know, hire additional devs to work on all the stuff that DCS players have asked for for years. That's what I meant by "resources". 

You don't like the idea, we got it.

12 minutes ago, lmp said:

It is on topic, because unless you want the tanks and the planes to synergize, then you're asking for two separate games in one... for the hell of it? Why not build a new game from scratch - it'll be easier!

Why would you put a helicopter in a fixed wing game?!?!?! Oh damn, why did they not produce a new game for the Apache or the Hind?!?!?! Oh weeeh. 😄

You're way off topic and i just remember why you had been on my ignore list already.

  • Like 1

image.png

Hardware: MSI B450 Gaming Plus MAX | Ryzen 5 3600X (6*3.8 Ghz) | 32 GB RAM | MSI Radeon RX5700 | Samsung SSD 860 QVO 1TB | DCS dedicated @ WD Blue 500 GB SSD | Win 10 (64-bit) | TM Warthog HOTAS, MFD and rudder pedals, TrackIR5

Wishlist:  Northern Germany/Baltic Sea theater | Full Fidelity Su-25A | Asset packs (80s Iran, Lebanon 1982, Syria 2011+ factions) | Persistent KB shortcuts | Proper coalitions system |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...