Santa's wishlist for BMS
-
@Buttons
+1 on trains, it’s very important tool for moving supply and war materials. -
Add a PKG communications page to the AI Communications set?
Though I LOVE the new AI comms output, it frustrates me just a bit (to negligible effect), when flying a single-player TE, to hear all the other flights in my PKG announcing “departing push point”, etc., when I can’t coordinate similarly.
In the furthest extreme, such functionality would disallow the AI flights in the PKG from departing the holding point until you announced your readiness to do so…
Of course, being able to coordinate with all flights in your PKG could open the door to all sorts of new coordination tactics (e.g., “SEAD, please stay on station just a bit longer”) but that’s just pipe-dreaming.
-
@Slothrop said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
Add a PKG communications page to the AI Communications set?
Though I LOVE the new AI comms output, it frustrates me just a bit (to negligible effect), when flying a single-player TE, to hear all the other flights in my PKG announcing “departing push point”, etc., when I can’t coordinate similarly.
In the furthest extreme, such functionality would disallow the AI flights in the PKG from departing the holding point until you announced your readiness to do so…
Of course, being able to coordinate with all flights in your PKG could open the door to all sorts of new coordination tactics (e.g., “SEAD, please stay on station just a bit longer”) but that’s just pipe-dreaming.
That would be the huge game changer. I’d call it a dream too, but after what was done with JTAC/FAC(A), I’m not so sure.
-
@vfp said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
one more thing how do you push buttons in vr? how do you control the plane besides throttle and stick ,and how much time
you can stay with vr without loosing your eyes and head? can you stay for 5 hours for example?Push buttons = PointCTRL finger tracker, mouse emulation. That currently works with DCS, X-plane, P3D and MSFS. As simple as pointing at a button with your finger and clicking a button on the side of your finger.
Flight time = 5hrs. Yes no problem, I regularly (2 times a week) fly 3-5 hours in VR, and have done as much as 10hrs in a day, I have been doing this for the last 7 years - in that time I’ve had 6 eye tests and have had no negative effects on my eyesight or anything else from VR. I also fly high performance RC aircraft and have noticed no eyesight issues from VR impacting my RC flying. There are absolutely some people who are sensitive to VR, however I get on with it extremely well. This is largely due to tuning my setup to maintain smooth FPS etc.
Honestly, I’m so tired of the general anti-VR sentiment and the feeling that VR can only be for short, non serious experiences. And that you cannot fly seriously in VR for any length of time, this is frankly bulls!%t. I and many other ppl fly seriously in VR, I use an IRL Kneeboard and modified VR headset so I can easily read it in VR. The hardware is out there to allow direct manipulation of cockpit in an extremely intuitive and quick way. Modern headsets are comfortable, light weight, high resolution and offer image quality comparable with monitors. The problems have been solved, it’s not 2014 any more.
I don’t understand the pushback against VR. Would I like a full F-16 simpit, with 270 deg screen and triple projectors etc? Yes absolutely - but I cannot afford it, and I don’t have space for it. VR + PointCTRL gives me 90% of the immersion of a sim pit for 5% of the price and 99% less space footprint. Plus it’s not fixed to one aircraft. I totally understand why some people don’t get on with it. But it does work for a great many people. Quit yucking my yum!
Yes us VR supporters are a tiny niche of the BMS community, but that’s because BMS doesn’t support it “if you build it, they will come” as they say.
I have no problem with BMS devs saying they have no interest in VR. I think it’s unfortunate and they are missing out but it’s their free time they are spending to bring us this sim, so they will work on what they want. It does make me sad that the dev who was working on VR is MIA though. Hope they are ok.
-
Don’t think it’s possible but improving the sense of speed down low would be nice
-
@SOBO-87 said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
@vfp said in On what grounds would you wish 4.37 to be developped?:
one more thing how do you push buttons in vr? how do you control the plane besides throttle and stick ,and how much time
you can stay with vr without loosing your eyes and head? can you stay for 5 hours for example?Push buttons = PointCTRL finger tracker, mouse emulation. That currently works with DCS, X-plane, P3D and MSFS. As simple as pointing at a button with your finger and clicking a button on the side of your finger.
Flight time = 5hrs. Yes no problem, I regularly (2 times a week) fly 3-5 hours in VR, and have done as much as 10hrs in a day, I have been doing this for the last 7 years - in that time I’ve had 6 eye tests and have had no negative effects on my eyesight or anything else from VR. I also fly high performance RC aircraft and have noticed no eyesight issues from VR impacting my RC flying. There are absolutely some people who are sensitive to VR, however I get on with it extremely well. This is largely due to tuning my setup to maintain smooth FPS etc.
Honestly, I’m so tired of the general anti-VR sentiment and the feeling that VR can only be for short, non serious experiences. And that you cannot fly seriously in VR for any length of time, this is frankly bulls!%t. I and many other ppl fly seriously in VR, I use an IRL Kneeboard and modified VR headset so I can easily read it in VR. The hardware is out there to allow direct manipulation of cockpit in an extremely intuitive and quick way. Modern headsets are comfortable, light weight, high resolution and offer image quality comparable with monitors. The problems have been solved, it’s not 2014 any more.
I don’t understand the pushback against VR. Would I like a full F-16 simpit, with 270 deg screen and triple projectors etc? Yes absolutely - but I cannot afford it, and I don’t have space for it. VR + PointCTRL gives me 90% of the immersion of a sim pit for 5% of the price and 99% less space footprint. Plus it’s not fixed to one aircraft. I totally understand why some people don’t get on with it. But it does work for a great many people. Quit yucking my yum!
Yes us VR supporters are a tiny niche of the BMS community, but that’s because BMS doesn’t support it “if you build it, they will come” as they say.
I have no problem with BMS devs saying they have no interest in VR. I think it’s unfortunate and they are missing out but it’s their free time they are spending to bring us this sim, so they will work on what they want. It does make me sad that the dev who was working on VR is MIA though. Hope they are ok.
This! PointCtrl makes a 3d cockpit almost as immersive as a fully 1:1 3d cockpit for a fraction of the cost. It beats anything that isn’t a 1:1 simpit. Right now I can’t get it to work in the Vorpx VR workaround for BMS VR, but since it crashes ~ 90% due to the UI, I can really test it well. But BMS is still very stable when you are in the 3D environment, getting there/getting out is the issue.
If you don’t want to pay/wait for a PointCtrl (which it is pretty simple, we should be able to get it to work in BMS at some point), one other solution is to remove some of the underside of the facial interface foam, or maybe even some of the plastic like Bergison has done here: https://bergisons.simpit.info/making_of_other
That works exactly like NVG look under works in real life. I modified my Pimax 8KX with just the facial interface and not the irreplaceable plastic of the headset and can see all of my ICP or one MFD at a time.Also I am currently using a 180 degree 3x55" 4K TV setup and would go back to VR if I could, but it is an ok makeshift solution. Nothing beats 1;1 headtracking, especially in BFM.
For kneeboard, I am currently using VRK, a virtual kneeboard that shows up in VR with a drawing tablet to write, such as 9 lines, and saved graphics/pdfs for reference. This could in theory work with with BMS since it is inserted into your SteamVR view no matter the VR app although it’s developer seems to have stopped supporting it. However there is a simialr replacement program in the works that is very similar.
-
I think a 128*128 Germany battlefield will be great! We can go back to 1980s ,1990s and experience a imaginative middle-class conflit between NATO and USSR。
-
@luochenyang
IIRC there was a central Europe theater.
'80 campaigns need proper F-16A, which I really’d love to be simulated in BMS. -
improving the sense of speed down low
I think the new terrain engine will help a ton with this. It’s just so hard to make it feel like you’re moving fast over a low poly flat texture. Even just getting displacement maps on that texture would be huge with all the minor detail it could add.
- More naval assets most of which can be civilian
This would be very nice, though not a current priority. I think modellers will have their hands full filling in buildings and such for the new terrain, plus the terrain itself.
- personal trucks, maybe a train
Yes, rail logistics would be great. Doing trucks, though, would require shapefiles of all the roadways on the map, unless it was just highways (a lot easier to do). It’s doable, but if they’re moving away from tiles, it means someone has to either hand-draw or create an automated program to draw out every street on the map… it’s a big task.
Trains would be much easier, at least train tracks. Again, probably not a 37 priority, but 38 or 40 it would be nice to fill int he world.
General question: how well simulated are logistics currently? I recall from much earlier versions that it was a rump system that didn’t have much impact on the campaign. Like taking out a supply depot or power station was very meh/unimportant.
-
RL based road network is quite doable, assuming new terrain will kinda match rl topography.
Many sims use imported openstreetmap data. -
Another nice addition would be an ability to access/change/save configuration details while in 3D.
Simple example: you zoom your FOV in/out until hitting the precise sweet spot for you. If you could capture that to “falcon bms.cfg” it would be wonderful. (No more of those lengthy run config, test, wash-rinse-repeat cycles.)
It has always puzzled me that BMS config exec is distinct from BMS itself. It seems archaic in this day and age. Most modern apps permit accessing all configuration details while in-game.
(Of course, given this, I’ll immediately ask for a config option to “set TrackIR center-point”. But such is the Herculean burden of the GUI dev.)
-
@Micro_440th
If you need a product lead, I can perhaps chime in. I’m in the industry too. -
@b0bl00i It would be great even if the three point guidance of the SAMs would be modeled.
This is the ONLY mode for the SA-8 and even against the most basic noise jamming is necessary to switch the SA-2 and SA-3., -
@b0bl00i Not sure what you mean.
-
graphics
-
@Micro_440th said in Santa's wishlist for BMS:
@b0bl00i Not sure what you mean.
-
@molnibalage It’s also good to have a back-up mode for tunguska, when commands sent towards the missile are encrypted and RWR doesn’t know what’s going on. And something with the behavior of the SA-5, because that SAM system is not effective at all in BMS. The SA-5 will quickly run out of missiles if you notch it or “blink” the ECM, but in real life you can’t know when it’s tracking you or firing at you.
-
@Foxtrot701 said in Santa's wishlist for BMS:
@molnibalage It’s also good to have a back-up mode for tunguska, when commands sent towards the missile are encrypted and RWR doesn’t know what’s going on. And something with the behavior of the SA-5, because that SAM system is not effective at all in BMS. The SA-5 will quickly run out of missiles if you notch it or “blink” the ECM, but in real life you can’t know when it’s tracking you or firing at you.
Whooooooooooooooo…
Nope…Just because you encrypt anything it does not mean that you can’t detect the electronic emission…
Also for the SA-5, I have to ask a think about that the RL vs BMS/Falcon.
One thing is sure in RL against Libya anytime S-200E launched everybody went under radar horizon.
(AWACS detected the climbing missile.) -
@Foxtrot701 said in Santa's wishlist for BMS:
@molnibalage It’s also good to have a back-up mode for tunguska, when commands sent towards the missile are encrypted and RWR doesn’t know what’s going on. And something with the behavior of the SA-5, because that SAM system is not effective at all in BMS. The SA-5 will quickly run out of missiles if you notch it or “blink” the ECM, but in real life you can’t know when it’s tracking you or firing at you.
About the SA-5. Yes, technically when the CW emission is online it can’t be decided that missile has been launched or not.
But considering how is operated the system if the CW emitter is active missile will comes soon. In the era or HARM using long CW emission just pretending a launch is very suicidal thing. It just provides the chance to loft AGM-88 under the horizon.
This happened in 1986, one fire control radar was hit by this method.
The SA-5 will be presented within months on mine YT channel.
The SA-3 within 2 weeks, hopefully. -
Boresighting Mavs on the ground before take off, which apparently is done in RL (?)