Flight Sims

[Red2112]

2 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

 

My most enjoyable time in DCS was when I was playing with a small group, doing combined arms operations. We had 3 guys on the ground managing Platoon and Company sized units and 3-4 in the air flying in support.

 

Unfortunately, I have yet to find an active VU that is interested in integrating any ground combat into their operations. Most units only want to do air to air, and can't even comprehend how to include a ground element. 

 

 

Count me in if you like. 

 

I have been trying the same (with my old VU) since Combined Arms came out. I even made a sceanrio so we could try JTAC Ops and get the feel for it (establish a flow doctrine) with a Kamov Ka50 and a Humvee Recon team (JTAC capable) on both sides.  CAS for the Ka-50, IN infiltrate to eliminate OPFOR CP.  It was a simple sceanrio to try the CA element between three-four units at most and explore there capabilities.  The end resault was to establish a work flow and find any flaws/issues in there use and operations.  You know how some folks are, if they find a obstacle while in MP, they soon have a s***fit!  So the idea was to have a smooth thought out game experience, in other words, served on a platter 😁

 

Best Ka-50 pilot I had, and that knew the potential of CA moved to the US and never saw him again, and the rest were basically jet pilots that all they wanted was a ground target to shot at, so I dropped the project...

[Marko]

6 hours ago, Red2112 said:

 

Count me in if you like. 

 

I have been trying the same (with my old VU) since Combined Arms came out. I even made a sceanrio so we could try JTAC Ops and get the feel for it (establish a flow doctrine) with a Kamov Ka50 and a Humvee Recon team (JTAC capable) on both sides.  CAS for the Ka-50, IN infiltrate to eliminate OPFOR CP.  It was a simple sceanrio to try the CA element between three-four units at most and explore there capabilities.  The end resault was to establish a work flow and find any flaws/issues in there use and operations.  You know how some folks are, if they find a obstacle while in MP, they soon have a s***fit!  So the idea was to have a smooth thought out game experience, in other words, served on a platter 😁

 

Best Ka-50 pilot I had, and that knew the potential of CA moved to the US and never saw him again, and the rest were basically jet pilots that all they wanted was a ground target to shot at, so I dropped the project...

Now might be a good time to recruit or test the waters to see if there's enough players interested.

Try contacting the Grim reapers over on the DCS forum. 

I have long held the view some type of co-op battle scenario between SB and DCS players as advantages  

 

[Red2112]

Thanks Marko. I´ll try, but I think Iam not the only one who would like to join the Grim Reapers, there well known so not easy to get into there VU.

[Apocalypse 31]

10 hours ago, Red2112 said:

JTAC Ops and get the feel for it (establish a flow doctrine) with a Kamov Ka50 and a Humvee Recon team (JTAC capable)

Not really what I had in mind, but that's the usual response. 

 

Sitting there with my laser on for 20 minutes isn't really my idea of fun.

 

I prefer it when a scenario has multiple lines of effort (ground and air) with several places that those lines connect. 

[Marko]

1 hour ago, Red2112 said:

Thanks Marko. I´ll try, but I think Iam not the only one who would like to join the Grim Reapers, there well known so not easy to get into there VU.

I was thinking along the lines of a SB VU running the ground offensive /defence while the reapers or some other DCS based VU

Run the air campaign, Mite be a bit ambitious but now would be a good time as Combined arms is free for a while the learning curve for combined arms is very

Easy A bit like WT or WOT.

 

Edited April 26, 2020 by Marko

[Apocalypse 31]

12 hours ago, Marko said:

I was thinking along the lines of a SB VU running the ground offensive /defence while the reapers or some other DCS based VU

I've attempted this before.

 

I was unable to find a DCS VU that:

 

1. Had the ability to even understand HOW to build a combined arms scenario.

 

2. Could understand how to work in a combined arms capacity

 

Again, most DCS players seem to want to play air quake and couldn't care less about what's going on below 2000ft

[Marko]

17 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

I've attempted this before.

 

I was unable to find a DCS VU that:

 

1. Had the ability to even understand HOW to build a combined arms scenario.

 

2. Could understand how to work in a combined arms capacity

 

Again, most DCS players seem to want to play air quake and couldn't care less about what's going on below 2000ft

That is a shame there loss, 

[Apocalypse 31]

15 minutes ago, Marko said:

That is a shame there loss, 

Maybe, but it's not their loss if they have no aspirations to do it.

 

DCS players seem content with air to air.

[Red2112]

3 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

DCS players seem content with air to air.

So true.

 

But I think that if ED made a effort to model there ground units in a similar way (Interiors, ect.) as SB dose, that might change some of those air heads thinking 😁

 

BTW, 20min. is what one spends in the lobby waiting for other players to get in, and then the later brefing.  That´s IF someone dosen´t have a fit about ordnance and/or OOB  used in the scenario, that would extended to a half hour more LOL! 

 

Aside from that, RECCE needs to find/scout the target before it can even lase it, and your SEAD or CAS would not be to far either (close to the no-fly zone).  As I said before, the whole Idea of the scenario was to put in practise some Ideas and work flows, and see the end resault.

 

--

Edited April 26, 2020 by Red2112

[Ssnake]

5 hours ago, Red2112 said:

But I think that if ED made a effort to model there ground units in a similar way (Interiors, ect.) as SB dose, that might change some of those air heads thinking 😁

It's not as if Steel Beasts is a brand new game in the simulations market. The number of jet pilots among the Steel Beasts users, while not zero, is not large. What makes you think that if the ground combat in DCS was more like Steel Beasts, these virtual pilots will suddenly all change their minds? A considerable fraction of jet pilots, real world or virtual, consider close air support beneath their dignity, deride the A-10, and give loving names like "mud hen" to the F-15. The theory that "simulation is simulation" is demonstrably false for the majority of flight simulation gamers. It's about flying, first and foremost. And there's nothing wrong with it. I'm just saying that based on my experience, the idea that if only you build a more detailed ground component the jet boys will come is not grounded in observable reality.

[Red2112]

 Not everybody in the simming community comes from a real world counter-part experience.  Actually, most of the flight simmers do so because they can´t afford a real world PPL, or never joined the AF, or got to be a fighter pilot.  I started as a flight simmer, moved to sub/naval simmer, and not to long ago here with SB.  Some simply enjoy simming milsim machines of which not everybody gets to do in real life.  Some might like planes more then tanks or the other way around, but what is true is that, if it´s not there, and/or has some atractions to it, how is anybody gonna have any interest in it?

 

 

[DarkAngel]

I do have a map in development which is part of the Caucuses map. Have often considered an SB-DCS cross over campaign set during the Abkhazian war in the early 90s.

[Ssnake]

5 hours ago, Red2112 said:

Not everybody in the simming community comes from a real world counter-part experience.  Actually, most of the flight simmers do so because they can´t afford a real world PPL, or never joined the AF, or got to be a fighter pilot.  I started as a flight simmer, moved to sub/naval simmer, and not to long ago here with SB.  Some simply enjoy simming milsim machines of which not everybody gets to do in real life.  Some might like planes more then tanks or the other way around,...

I'm not disputing anything that you write up to this point. These divergent interestes and motivations all exist.

 

but what is true is that, if it´s not there, and/or has some atractions to it, how is anybody gonna have any interest in it?

Well, that's my point. Arguably it is there - in the form of SB Pro, now also tentatively in DCS World - but customer demographics do not suggest that the interest is very big. Maybe it can be developed. But creating your own market is always harder than serving what an already existing market demands. To you and me and probably other readers of this thread the integration of a CAS element into ground and air simulations has immediate appeal. To the rest of the flight sim audience, demonstrably less so.

[Red2112]

5 hours ago, Ssnake said:

I'm not disputing anything that you write up to this point. These divergent interestes and motivations all exist.

 

Well, that's my point. Arguably it is there - in the form of SB Pro, now also tentatively in DCS World - but customer demographics do not suggest that the interest is very big. Maybe it can be developed. But creating your own market is always harder than serving what an already existing market demands. To you and me and probably other readers of this thread the integration of a CAS element into ground and air simulations has immediate appeal. To the rest of the flight sim audience, demonstrably less so.

I agree. It´s what some call a niche market, and similarly niche is the wargaming market too.  There´s more pilots as you say, but not in a jet fighter world (DCS).  The big chunk of simmer pilots are on a civil platform, of which I agree even more wil not have a interest in ground vehicles (maybe Farming Simulator 2019 ), or air combat tactics, I agree there too.

 

What I think, and could be totaly wrong (with the DCS fans), is that maybe if those ground units would have more detail put into were you spend more time (office/interior), then maybe some of those that fly above would move to the ground from time, to time.  Take for example Dangerous Waters, while most of the sub simmers jumped right into a Sea Wolve class sub, we slowly moved onto learning the P-3 Orion, and the Oliver Hazard Perry.  Totaly different platforms, but as well detailed as its sub fleet in the game.  In the end, you had alot of sub simmers that were enjoying the other platforms in the game and creating good and fun scenarios, when initialy most were sub drivers.  They even added (although broken to a point) the multi-crew aspect to it.

 

I agree it´s a difficult market, but DCS already has the platform done and has a good dose of a fan base in general of which is aware that CA exist.  It took them a long time to fix the issues with the trees, which put alot of people off from the start.  Just saying that with a bit of care, some "might" put more time into playing it.  Personally I don´t think it can compete with SB Pro, but then I also think that if more effort was put into it, those that enjoy it and were looking for some steps above, would turn there heads to SB Pro.  Same could work the other way around, If SB Pro could have a couple of (Apache/Cobra) of simultaed (In cabin) helos, with a fidelity of say Janes Longbow, some of those DCS pilots might try SB Pro and end up driving a tank or two.  But again, small market for just the brave and hardcore players like us.

 

Dreaming a bit there in the last part, but you know what I mean.

[Red2112]

10 hours ago, DarkAngel said:

I do have a map in development which is part of the Caucuses map. Have often considered an SB-DCS cross over campaign set during the Abkhazian war in the early 90s.

That´s great and good to know. Thanks.

 

There was a user here @Los, that did just that with his group, cross-platform with other games. They even used wargames in between IIRC.

[Apocalypse 31]

@DarkAngel are you referring to the Gaduata map that was released with 4.1?

 

[stormrider_sp]

21 hours ago, Ssnake said:

It's not as if Steel Beasts is a brand new game in the simulations market. The number of jet pilots among the Steel Beasts users, while not zero, is not large. What makes you think that if the ground combat in DCS was more like Steel Beasts, these virtual pilots will suddenly all change their minds? A considerable fraction of jet pilots, real world or virtual, consider close air support beneath their dignity, deride the A-10, and give loving names like "mud hen" to the F-15. The theory that "simulation is simulation" is demonstrably false for the majority of flight simulation gamers. It's about flying, first and foremost. And there's nothing wrong with it. I'm just saying that based on my experience, the idea that if only you build a more detailed ground component the jet boys will come is not grounded in observable reality.

The opposite might not be true. If they release an AH-64, I'd be their first costumer.

[stormrider_sp]

20 hours ago, Red2112 said:

 Not everybody in the simming community comes from a real world counter-part experience.  Actually, most of the flight simmers do so because they can´t afford a real world PPL, or never joined the AF, or got to be a fighter pilot.  I started as a flight simmer, moved to sub/naval simmer, and not to long ago here with SB.  Some simply enjoy simming milsim machines of which not everybody gets to do in real life.  Some might like planes more then tanks or the other way around, but what is true is that, if it´s not there, and/or has some atractions to it, how is anybody gonna have any interest in it?

 

 

janes 688i hk?

[Marko]

52 minutes ago, stormrider_sp said:

The opposite might not be true. If they release an AH-64, I'd be their first costumer.

The Mi -24 is near beta i believe 

 

[Red2112]

1 hour ago, stormrider_sp said:

janes 688i hk?

Yes, with Mr @Homer as VADM in The Seawolves.org 😉

 

Great times!

[Marko]

10 minutes ago, Red2112 said:

Yes, with Mr @Homer as VADM in The Seawolves.org 😉

 

Great times!

I have asked for subs in game before still waiting on a answer.

Would love to sink a sub with tank fire.

Bet it would be a first in any game.LoL

Edited April 27, 2020 by Marko

[DarkAngel]

8 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

@DarkAngel are you referring to the Gaduata map that was released with 4.1?

 

Yes and no... Same map but rebuilt with better data.

 

[Apocalypse 31]

3 hours ago, Marko said:

The Mi -24 is near beta i believe 

 

Oh, you poor thing. 

[Marko]

1 hour ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Oh, you poor thing. 

My bad i meant Alpha.

 

DCS Announcement .

 

External model and cockpit texturing
The detail in all respects of the external model is coming along very well.

Aft crew station
Cockpit instrument panels and other control systems animation are being programmed.

Mapping Display
The feature set is in the final stages of the definition.

Flight Model
Good progress is being made. Once the final touches have been delivered on the DCS: P-47 Thunderbolt
Early Access, the full focus will go onto the Mi-24P.

See in development screenshot

[stormrider_sp]

11 hours ago, Red2112 said:

Yes, with Mr @Homer as VADM in The Seawolves.org 😉

 

Great times!

Oh yes, great times! At one point I was XO of our fleet, La Armada Invencible!