Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?
-
@gusva BMS has infantry soldiers
-
Hi, I’ve been diving and I know the degree of difficulty in developing the BMS, including the IFF, which was a great implementation, I thought it was fantastic, I coincidentally asked for this implementation.
The simulator’s depth has been going very well to the point of bumping into classified issues.
The big one (big in question in the size of the effort to be made) is the graphic that is almost exceptional. But this detail ends up putting a flaw in sight. We can have a direction for where we want to go on a priority list.
My suggestions, I hope, will please those who want the BMS to be the best simulator.
cheers
-
@oakdesign Amazing, we need a ground crew helping on ramp start.
cheers!
-
Yeees, good things are coming to BMS, just be patient, a lil bird told me so
-
@gusva don’t forget that we are a small team and we are not a commercial company
-
@tgw said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
Yeees, good things are coming to BMS, just be patient, a lil bird told me so
would good things include a good ground modeling?
-
@alfred said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@tgw said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
Yeees, good things are coming to BMS, just be patient, a lil bird told me so
would good things include a good ground modeling?
real sick of slaving my TGP to a “hot” target only to have it be a 2D house on the terrain texture file…:(
-
@bad-boy Yeah i know, it’s just my wish
-
@tgw good! i wait your bird sing more!
-
@alfred not before 4.37…
The new terrain engine isn’t ready yet for public release and we have other things you’ll be able to play with in 4.36
-
@gusva said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
Gentlemen,
With the new technologies in graphics cards I see that we have many new graphics effects that should be implemented in the next versions of the BMS, not only that, we should think about improving the graphics beyond the simulators that have no title competitors, but are not even close the degree of maturity of this beautiful project that is the BMS.
I’m going to put below 3 items that, in addition to improving the graphics engine, it would be desirable to have in the BMS, thus we would be far from these pretentious competitors.
1 - Global World
We have many sets or theaters of war, KTO being original is the greatest example of efforts to always be very well done, and it really is a great setting. But we have several scenarios that share partially or totally the same maps, this is very isible in scenarios across the Mediterranean where each scenario has to make another map.
My suggestion would be to make a code core where the base is a global scenario, a globe, without graphics, and each map generated creates the 3D of those conflicts in that region. For example, Balcans takes Italy and part of Greece, so the Greece vs Turkey war scenario shares the same map. It would be visible the sum of efforts of the developers of these two scenarios creating separate theaters of war but improving the same region of the 3D map. This would increase development efforts in the same location without re-mapping the maps and still give you better control over the approval of code to enter the BMS without making errors.
The difference would be the choice of the theater of war, which you choose by geographic coordinates the conflict zone on the map already developed or under development. Gulf War, Israel, Greece x Turkey, show a complete zone that all these developers together would make the same map and would have several separate theaters of war each with its history and its conflict.
2 - Weather system
We have a simple weather system in the BMS, where graphical improvements should be focused here, but reality can also help us. It could implement in the BMS code base the weather forecast based also on real information in NOAA. Below is the topic I wrote about this topic.
Wheater Suggestion3 - NPC crew participating in the simulation
I’ll be clearer here, it would be very interesting to have in the BMS code (in GTA5 it’s called NPC) I don’t really know the name, but people controlled by the AI that would be, for example, airport ground crews and/or the Aircraft Carriers that would participate in the RAMP like for example would remove the shocks, the red flags of the landing gear and armament among all the preparations for takeoff. Of course, in the future it could include soldiers in the battlefields as there were in Falcon 4, but in Falcon 4 they were in 2d.
that’s my 5 cents of opinion
For item #2
On The graphics side YES definitively we need to improve clouds massively
But we have a weather model , with temp , pressure , humidity , clouds types , turbulences , wind , wind aloft , convection , clouds elevations , number shape and sizes. , icing conditions , fog , everything evolving in time ,and space
I wouldn’t say our model is so simple ……but that’s my POV.
We need much nicer clouds drawing but our weather modeling is already way ahead some -erm- “competitors”
And for your information we do have real weather modeling in BMS based on GFS forecasts , maybe you don’t know how to use it ?
-
@mav-jp Hi mav-jp can you tell if interconnection between weather and terrain was considered?
I mean for example hot sunny day causes come parts of the terrain like rocks, cities or airbases (or any places which warms faster) to heat up and thus being more likely generate thermals and such phenomenas, up/down drifts or wind direction changes related to landscape shape, clouds forming along the sea coasts etc…
I know BMS in a weather simulation and dong it on at even basic level might be quite costly in terms of CPU power needed, but with new terrain engine and overall code restructure it could open some possibilities.
Also iirc such thing was attempted by FlightGear guys and it kinda works for them with some nice results.P.S.
+1 on clouds but take your time guys -
@xeno Well the question more what can have an impact on a fighter jet on the weather side…
I have not seen an F-16 pilot looking for thermals unless soaring the new way to drop bombs silently
-
the bird strike causing the engine fail…
FYI: It 's a joke! -
@xeno said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@mav-jp Hi mav-jp can you tell if interconnection between weather and terrain was considered?
I mean for example hot sunny day causes come parts of the terrain like rocks, cities or airbases (or any places which warms faster) to heat up and thus being more likely generate thermals and such phenomenas, up/down drifts or wind direction changes related to landscape shape, clouds forming along the sea coasts etc…
I know BMS in a weather simulation and dong it on at even basic level might be quite costly in terms of CPU power needed, but with new terrain engine and overall code restructure it could open some possibilities.
Also iirc such thing was attempted by FlightGear guys and it kinda works for them with some nice results.P.S.
+1 on clouds but take your time guysi am a real glider pilot and what you describe here, while totally relevant for glider simulator like Condo is totally irrelevant for a military combat sim. So we wont take time to code this as it would be a total waste of time. We take weather from GFS forecast and apply clouds where the file says there are clouds
Convective turbulence is however modeled depending on terrain type and sun elevation and sun power of course. So in BMS your convective turbulence force is dependant on those parameters, that’s the only interaction with ground and it’s already overkill actually
-
@maxwaldorf the what now? That’s super exciting. Is there a time machine I want to fast forward two years
-
@mav-jp @MaxWaldorf
Thanks for clarification. I was mostly concerned about how transition between air masses of different state affects aircraft esp during low level flights or landing approaches, where sudden change of lift available might get scary.
But if you consider what we have already enough that’s good to know. -
@xeno said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?:
@mav-jp @MaxWaldorf
Thanks for clarification. I was mostly concerned about how transition between air masses of different state affects aircraft esp during low level flights or landing approaches, where sudden change of lift available might get scary.
But if you consider what we have already enough that’s good to know.That is simulated with mechanical and convective turbulences
-
@gusva said in Some suggestions for improvements for the next versions -4.5 ?]:
3 - NPC crew participating in the simulation
I’ll be clearer here, it would be very interesting to have in the BMS code (in GTA5 it’s called NPC) I don’t really know the name, but people controlled by the AI that would be, for example, airport ground crews and/or the Aircraft Carriers that would participate in the RAMP like for example would remove the shocks, the red flags of the landing gear and armament among all the preparations for takeoff. Of course, in the future it could include soldiers in the battlefields as there were in Falcon 4, but in Falcon 4 they were in 2d.
All,
This is one thing I have noticed (flying single player and developing TEs), is that our airbases/flight lines/ramps lack activity. At a busy airbase there is always something going on pretty much around the clock. Bomb carts pulling munitions, maintainers going about their work, refueling trucks, etc. It seems rather “lonely” when I come back from a mission and taxi back to the ramp to see nothing whatsoever going on. So, I would like to see more activity at our airbases. Agreeing with @gusva also about ground crew interaction at the ramp. I would like to hear verbal feedback from my ground crew, for example when I direct chocks out, I want to hear (and see subtitles for) “Chocks are out, Sir”, “EPU Safety pin is out, sir” etc. I want to have to tell them to stand by for engine start on JFS2, and get an acknowledgement, "Testing Control surfaces etc. Put the ladder on my jet…And how about when you ask Ground for "Taxi back to the rampñ they actually respond with which ramp space to go to. Ramps could be numbered from each approach end sequentially so I could develop ground ATC sound frags to say, for example: “Spider 6 1, taxi back to ramp 08 02 you are cleared all the way in.” where the first number is the approach end of the runway opposite of the active (since you are at that end when you finish your landing roll) and the second is the ramp slot (2nd from the end). Along with ground crew with wands to guide you in! I’ll even volunteer to clone the voice frags!
I think all of this would really help with the immersion and the realism of this already very realistic simulation.
Thanks for making BMS great! On to the next level!
Regards,
Tomcattwo -
If possible (and I understand that’s a big ‘if’ given the modeling involved), it would be great to have some “default” ground/landing-gear handling for the planes that don’t have AFMs. I don’t mind that they’re not full fidelity, but every once in a while I have the desire to fly, e.g., a Tornado in the sim, and it’s a bit of a bummer when it sticks to the runway on takeoff and landing.
Let me stress that this is a very minor complaint/suggestion, as I love BMS (4.35 U3 is incredible) and I understand that it focuses primarily on the F-16, but thought I would bring it up.