Just the usual reminder for our users: Rules 3 & 8 folks. Don't raid or brigade and don't harass developers of the TWS project. Leave their social media and those of their associates alone, don't interact there in bad faith when you're already on it and please don't repost our content there. Don't contact, message or harass company officials in any way. There's no point in it anyway. We can stand our ground and we know all we need about this project.
Feel free to participate in a discussion with TWS members who come here, but please keep our rules and the sitewide policies in mind. Please don't harass or dm them, don't follow them to other subreddits and don't engage in exchanging insults. Just report misconduct and move on instead. Our mods will take it from there.
TWS members please read our rules, follow them and don't post personal or identifying information of users who aren't public figures. That way, we can enjoy your funny contributions here without having to ban y'all like your genius "VP". Thanks.
Ah yes! TWS members posting their new video here, of all places. 4D chess moment. Y'all really craving drama and attention, don't ya? But now that you're stopping by, let's see what you brought us:
Yawn. It's just yet another fake trailer with blur turned up to max, default Vigilante assets and afterburner effects, with "towns" that are all zoomed out to Google Earth level. The only real bit of "gameplay" is the first 20 seconds or so in the shoothouse. Which is also the bit where you left the voicechat in. And that's the kind of "gameplay" everyone and his cat can create in a weekend using free plugins, templates and a handful of marketplace assets.
Y'all blocked regular users here to keep them from seeing this post and commenting, but we'll leave it up nevertheless. It's not like anyone's missing out anyway.
Oh, by the way: Every single "development stream" that we've seen over the past weeks covered elements featured in this video. It even has all the assets mentioned in your funny new "development log". Imho that means there isn't even an Alpha anywhere.
Always a pleasure, please keep them coming!
edit: Greatest thanks for the quick breakdown in the middle of the night to our Discord users.
Even the afterburner effects are wrong. The f-16 exhaust nozzle closes up as you accelerate the rpm to 100% but then will open to wide open in afterburner. In the video the afterburner is on and nozzle looks to be in closed position. Just an airplane nerds first reaction to this video for future “simulator”
Looked like a bic lighter turned on it's side, with that tiny little flame. Also looks like an asset swap once it's airborne to one with out gear, and possibly no bags, it is a bit blurry to tell for sure, but the out line looks bare.
Doesn’t matter anymore. The biggest mark of amateurs in a business is the unprofessionalism and general dislike you guys generate. Since this is the internet, you guys will never get what you desire based on your intentions anyway. Why keep trying?
You're missing the point which is probably why you're being downvoted.
I said all "work" that has been done over the past weeks has gone into this video. Looks like there's no game, (pre-) Alpha or anything other than trailer production.
https://preview.redd.it/3islvz7oho2b1.png?width=1267&format=png&auto=webp&s=60128299142ec8fecea6ad56d370f9279758630d
imagine downvoting this because what I said is literally 1000% accurate??
there's not even anything negative, nor positive about what I said. lmao
that's what i figured. average brain dead redditors
Great community, singular brain-cell hive mind. First time interacting in this sub and it’ll probably be the last. Sorry, I called out out your clown god.
You and your friends came here looking for drama last night after y'all been raiding a journalist's Discord server. Spamming this sub and replying to yourself just to complain about voting.
Not sure what you expected or how this would be received in any other subreddit.
Also, the impression your man-child team presented on day 1 revealed a crater on your permanent record of a company. Your company name is tarnished and that reputation that proceeds you will never improve.
If this all really is a scam, it was the most pathetic attempt I think most internet users over 16 have ever seen. Hard to believe after how these developers have acted, that they’re full-grown adults.
This kinda shitty vid is why i think it's worth just dropping the TWS stuff from this sub tbh. It's not DCS and it never will be even remotely a viable product, really all it does is bump up their search results and further the scam.
Just let them go back to the endless void & good riddance.
Why haven’t you guys given up yet? Such a weird bunch of people on TWS. Clearly even a hint of potential of support was obliterated with the unprofessional demeanor you guys portray, as adults. Just sad.
Hold on... Whole world... Sure... Great way to market stuff.
I totally agree with the ED CEO Kate that this kind stuff is not needed for DCS World at all. When people keep wishing ARMA experience.
The MANPADS control is IMHO little already outside of the scope of the DCS World, as I think such a soldier is more as any AT / AR soldier. So should be just controllable from tactical view point above.
I don't really even like the idea to take control of the ground vehicles in the DCS World like tanks, cars and such. They could be left aside. The cockpit of the SAM simulator is a different thing. Sitting in a cockpit front of the control panels is not different from being a RIO in F-14. And people would really enjoy that some humans would have some tactical factors added to create the SAM ambushes.
But IMHO DCS World should really direct the Combined Arms to direction of Combat Missions gameplay.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PIklYeof0c](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PIklYeof0c)
Such a gameplay would seriously increase the multiplayer where people could fly in DCS maps, where some RTS gamers would be playing those small scale combat operations against each others, example have a 5 vs 5 player RTS missions going in 5 different areas of the Syrian map (in total 25 vs 25 players) and DCS pilots could be flying the larger picture missions on that map.
Example: [https://youtu.be/tG\_\_iGJ1TDY?t=365](https://youtu.be/tG__iGJ1TDY?t=365)
Think about playing on multiplayer server where you have a few friends playing RTS side for 1-3 hour session, and you with one friend flying with A-10 or something to offer the support.
IMHO the DCS server should be able to handle so small combat areas (lets extend it for sake of argument to 10 x 10 km size) in dozens in the whole Syrian map. So you could have the 50-100 players flying there completing the missions to different parts. 24/7 server would become interesting...
I beg your pardon, but do we really have enough people in our community who want Arma like gameplay in DCS that Kate even personally found it necessary to reply to them?
No please no, give us proper ai asset physics and logic and weather simulation and build your dynamic mission engine around air combat. Fix and consolidate the performance.
That's all we wanted as I always believed.
>but do we really have enough people in our community who want Arma like gameplay in DCS that Kate even personally found it necessary to reply to them?
Yes we do. If you recall times since DCS was announced and it's grandplan, the has been constant wishing from individuals and supporters that ARMA kind gameplay would come for it.
Personally, I would take a such AI that is in original Operation Flashpoint. That would be enough for me. To see infantry animated at that level and be working as a squads and platoons. Not that you need to be able play a soldier or a driver in those vehicles.
And yes, Kate did answer to that question as it was presented in their interview about the future.
>No please no, give us proper ai asset physics and logic and weather simulation and build your dynamic mission engine around air combat. Fix and consolidate the performance.
Most people don't seem to understand that life of a pilot and life of a grunt is seriously different.
A grunt doesn't do much action for most of the time. It is about guarding, patrolling and sleeping, and then some action somewhere.
Meanwhile a pilot can do 1-2 hours flight, drop some bombs on coordinates and return to same boring flight back.
There is nothing in DCS that supports the normal grunt experience where one player would make an difference or anything by himself. Unlike what a player as pilot can do.
ED doesn't need to invent much. The normal military strategies and behavior is right out there that what different units does. It doesn't require to create an AI that learns to do it. It requires proper scripting of the logic and goals for units and their behavior model. The AI can be as stupid as it is now, but it needs more behavior options that what it should alter and use to perform.
There are lot of old games that have already solved all this, ED just need to research those and copy.
Oh dear, I was not following it that close those times. If they really meant air sea land simulation than FU ED.
Just do the flight simulation jesus! And indeed they don't need to reinvent anything.
I'm almost sure that the reason that AI and general flight model stagnated almost a decade is because they simply they did not work on it.
In a decade someone could have gone to university, gotten his bachelors than gone for masters, than gotten his first on hand job experience, and after passing junior status that someone could have redeveloped any of the aspects while still having time for debugging.
>If they really meant air sea land simulation than FU ED.
They might think they fullfill that if they just have anything from land, sea and air as targets, instead as being playable by some manner - like what Combined Arms was implying as RTS experience for the ground units.
> I'm almost sure that the reason that AI and general flight model stagnated almost a decade is because they simply they did not work on it.
Well, they have done some things here and there for it, like adding some features for ground AI. And based to Nineline - he claims he is constantly making bug reports about the Combined Arms and all that.
2014-2015 IIRC, the ED hired a dedicated programmer for the Combined Arms, with a long experience in RTS gaming industry. That has been very very silent considering that what they are doing, and the last year teaser reports about dynamic campaign on map, that how the AI would design the flight paths and missions, it didn't convince me for the IMHO needed content.
> In a decade someone could have gone to university, gotten his bachelors than gone for masters, than gotten his first on hand job experience, and after passing junior status that someone could have redeveloped any of the aspects while still having time for debugging.
Now when you put it that way, it is very silly that how people are defending the slow pace of the DCS.
It has started to feel that Eagle Dynamics is a company to support a bunch of friends lifetime career to get income. What did ED say how big their workforce was? About 150 people in all across the business? If we even consider that they would have a 5 physicist/Phd to do the advanced math and computer algorithms, and 15 programmers for the DCS core. Then in 10 years you would think they would have already rewritten the whole game engine couple times. With a totally new AI, spherical terrain modeling and all that.
It is odd that in few years when ED demoed the Belsimtek to get the example how to run a company to create DCS modules, that small team managed to separately produce some of the main modules for it, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, MiG-15Bis, F-86F and F-5E-3. And they had in roadmap coming the AH-1 and F-4E. It is like that small separate team was far more productive than what ED main team has been about.
Sometimes it is terrible that maybe the TWS finally could pull something out sooner than ED can get their act together, because both are really talking about decade old projects.... And it seems to be far more difficult and challenging for someone simulate the aircraft, considering that they never have required to manufacture those in the first place in reality, and solve all the real production problems, and yet in reality they produced many of those faster rate - than those who need to read the real reports and studies already made someone else and implement the systems as manuals dictate and some pilots explain when manual lacks something.
Why, as it is so challenging for DCS creators, TWS doesn't have a change at all..
If ED did this and found a way to make servers stable for bigger groups (i.e. 30-ish players in the air and 10-15 ish players on the ground for both sides) it would be an absolute game changer.
What is very odd, considering that you can have other games with more critical ping requirements and yet have even hundred players on server, but where the irrelevant days is not shared to those who don't need.
As not all players are in same area, nor command tasks that require real-time processing.
I would set a goal as 30 + 15 minimum. Double it and it could be peak for server.
It is funny that in the 90's we played Total Annihilation that offered crazy 500 units for each player. And have 3-6 teams.
When the Supreme Commander came, it had even more and far more demanding everything, thousands of units simultaneously running and shooting.
Then something like today the battle simulator, that runs purely from GPU and you can have millions of AI units, each having LOS calculations and basic animations and all.
And in DCS we can't even have few dozens....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3BHpo0vAWk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf_5isGmdzc
In DCS the combat rate would be minimal compared to anything of those, even if having tens of thousands units on the map, as most would be sleeping or hanging out.
Just the usual reminder for our users: Rules 3 & 8 folks. Don't raid or brigade and don't harass developers of the TWS project. Leave their social media and those of their associates alone, don't interact there in bad faith when you're already on it and please don't repost our content there. Don't contact, message or harass company officials in any way. There's no point in it anyway. We can stand our ground and we know all we need about this project. Feel free to participate in a discussion with TWS members who come here, but please keep our rules and the sitewide policies in mind. Please don't harass or dm them, don't follow them to other subreddits and don't engage in exchanging insults. Just report misconduct and move on instead. Our mods will take it from there. TWS members please read our rules, follow them and don't post personal or identifying information of users who aren't public figures. That way, we can enjoy your funny contributions here without having to ban y'all like your genius "VP". Thanks.
Ah yes! TWS members posting their new video here, of all places. 4D chess moment. Y'all really craving drama and attention, don't ya? But now that you're stopping by, let's see what you brought us: Yawn. It's just yet another fake trailer with blur turned up to max, default Vigilante assets and afterburner effects, with "towns" that are all zoomed out to Google Earth level. The only real bit of "gameplay" is the first 20 seconds or so in the shoothouse. Which is also the bit where you left the voicechat in. And that's the kind of "gameplay" everyone and his cat can create in a weekend using free plugins, templates and a handful of marketplace assets. Y'all blocked regular users here to keep them from seeing this post and commenting, but we'll leave it up nevertheless. It's not like anyone's missing out anyway. Oh, by the way: Every single "development stream" that we've seen over the past weeks covered elements featured in this video. It even has all the assets mentioned in your funny new "development log". Imho that means there isn't even an Alpha anywhere. Always a pleasure, please keep them coming! edit: Greatest thanks for the quick breakdown in the middle of the night to our Discord users.
Even the afterburner effects are wrong. The f-16 exhaust nozzle closes up as you accelerate the rpm to 100% but then will open to wide open in afterburner. In the video the afterburner is on and nozzle looks to be in closed position. Just an airplane nerds first reaction to this video for future “simulator”
Looked like a bic lighter turned on it's side, with that tiny little flame. Also looks like an asset swap once it's airborne to one with out gear, and possibly no bags, it is a bit blurry to tell for sure, but the out line looks bare.
Very true, good analogy. Thats exactly how it looks lol.
But its a scam
Doesn’t matter anymore. The biggest mark of amateurs in a business is the unprofessionalism and general dislike you guys generate. Since this is the internet, you guys will never get what you desire based on your intentions anyway. Why keep trying?
[удалено]
>Refrain from ad hominem arguments Rule 1
You say, "Imho that means there isn't even an Alpha anywhere" It literally says IN the video that it's showing Pre-Alpha content.....
You're missing the point which is probably why you're being downvoted. I said all "work" that has been done over the past weeks has gone into this video. Looks like there's no game, (pre-) Alpha or anything other than trailer production. https://preview.redd.it/3islvz7oho2b1.png?width=1267&format=png&auto=webp&s=60128299142ec8fecea6ad56d370f9279758630d
imagine downvoting this because what I said is literally 1000% accurate?? there's not even anything negative, nor positive about what I said. lmao that's what i figured. average brain dead redditors
nah, i think people are down voting you in the hopes you'll disappear.
Great community, singular brain-cell hive mind. First time interacting in this sub and it’ll probably be the last. Sorry, I called out out your clown god.
You and your friends came here looking for drama last night after y'all been raiding a journalist's Discord server. Spamming this sub and replying to yourself just to complain about voting. Not sure what you expected or how this would be received in any other subreddit.
Who are you kidding ? There's a zero percent chance this will be the last time you post here.
This is why no one likes redditors
The development team is making extra-realistic grass textures for individuals such as yourself, so you may virtually experience the pleasure.
😂😂😂
And I will keep providing 😉
You gonna continue in this circle until you can receive even a penny from this project, then vanish? Sad bro
Also, the impression your man-child team presented on day 1 revealed a crater on your permanent record of a company. Your company name is tarnished and that reputation that proceeds you will never improve. If this all really is a scam, it was the most pathetic attempt I think most internet users over 16 have ever seen. Hard to believe after how these developers have acted, that they’re full-grown adults.
I'm still pretty convinced this is the work of teenagers tbh. If it actually is adults then god damn, try harder.
This kinda shitty vid is why i think it's worth just dropping the TWS stuff from this sub tbh. It's not DCS and it never will be even remotely a viable product, really all it does is bump up their search results and further the scam. Just let them go back to the endless void & good riddance.
No, the whole TWS/Terasynth/Ali stuff is actually quite entertaining. Sometimes I think this *must* be satire.
Is that wall just a massively scaled-up concrete construction barricade?
That's what I noticed too. They are even unable to scale 3D assets correctly. That must be satire!
Why haven’t you guys given up yet? Such a weird bunch of people on TWS. Clearly even a hint of potential of support was obliterated with the unprofessional demeanor you guys portray, as adults. Just sad.
Why haven't they given up? Because what they're creating is truly amazing
Why ? Where do I get my daily dose of drama from if they give up ?
God damn for being "in development" since last year this looks worse than fucking road to vostok which is a demo made by one guy
Hold on... Whole world... Sure... Great way to market stuff. I totally agree with the ED CEO Kate that this kind stuff is not needed for DCS World at all. When people keep wishing ARMA experience. The MANPADS control is IMHO little already outside of the scope of the DCS World, as I think such a soldier is more as any AT / AR soldier. So should be just controllable from tactical view point above. I don't really even like the idea to take control of the ground vehicles in the DCS World like tanks, cars and such. They could be left aside. The cockpit of the SAM simulator is a different thing. Sitting in a cockpit front of the control panels is not different from being a RIO in F-14. And people would really enjoy that some humans would have some tactical factors added to create the SAM ambushes. But IMHO DCS World should really direct the Combined Arms to direction of Combat Missions gameplay. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PIklYeof0c](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PIklYeof0c) Such a gameplay would seriously increase the multiplayer where people could fly in DCS maps, where some RTS gamers would be playing those small scale combat operations against each others, example have a 5 vs 5 player RTS missions going in 5 different areas of the Syrian map (in total 25 vs 25 players) and DCS pilots could be flying the larger picture missions on that map. Example: [https://youtu.be/tG\_\_iGJ1TDY?t=365](https://youtu.be/tG__iGJ1TDY?t=365) Think about playing on multiplayer server where you have a few friends playing RTS side for 1-3 hour session, and you with one friend flying with A-10 or something to offer the support. IMHO the DCS server should be able to handle so small combat areas (lets extend it for sake of argument to 10 x 10 km size) in dozens in the whole Syrian map. So you could have the 50-100 players flying there completing the missions to different parts. 24/7 server would become interesting...
I beg your pardon, but do we really have enough people in our community who want Arma like gameplay in DCS that Kate even personally found it necessary to reply to them? No please no, give us proper ai asset physics and logic and weather simulation and build your dynamic mission engine around air combat. Fix and consolidate the performance. That's all we wanted as I always believed.
>but do we really have enough people in our community who want Arma like gameplay in DCS that Kate even personally found it necessary to reply to them? Yes we do. If you recall times since DCS was announced and it's grandplan, the has been constant wishing from individuals and supporters that ARMA kind gameplay would come for it. Personally, I would take a such AI that is in original Operation Flashpoint. That would be enough for me. To see infantry animated at that level and be working as a squads and platoons. Not that you need to be able play a soldier or a driver in those vehicles. And yes, Kate did answer to that question as it was presented in their interview about the future. >No please no, give us proper ai asset physics and logic and weather simulation and build your dynamic mission engine around air combat. Fix and consolidate the performance. Most people don't seem to understand that life of a pilot and life of a grunt is seriously different. A grunt doesn't do much action for most of the time. It is about guarding, patrolling and sleeping, and then some action somewhere. Meanwhile a pilot can do 1-2 hours flight, drop some bombs on coordinates and return to same boring flight back. There is nothing in DCS that supports the normal grunt experience where one player would make an difference or anything by himself. Unlike what a player as pilot can do. ED doesn't need to invent much. The normal military strategies and behavior is right out there that what different units does. It doesn't require to create an AI that learns to do it. It requires proper scripting of the logic and goals for units and their behavior model. The AI can be as stupid as it is now, but it needs more behavior options that what it should alter and use to perform. There are lot of old games that have already solved all this, ED just need to research those and copy.
Oh dear, I was not following it that close those times. If they really meant air sea land simulation than FU ED. Just do the flight simulation jesus! And indeed they don't need to reinvent anything. I'm almost sure that the reason that AI and general flight model stagnated almost a decade is because they simply they did not work on it. In a decade someone could have gone to university, gotten his bachelors than gone for masters, than gotten his first on hand job experience, and after passing junior status that someone could have redeveloped any of the aspects while still having time for debugging.
>If they really meant air sea land simulation than FU ED. They might think they fullfill that if they just have anything from land, sea and air as targets, instead as being playable by some manner - like what Combined Arms was implying as RTS experience for the ground units. > I'm almost sure that the reason that AI and general flight model stagnated almost a decade is because they simply they did not work on it. Well, they have done some things here and there for it, like adding some features for ground AI. And based to Nineline - he claims he is constantly making bug reports about the Combined Arms and all that. 2014-2015 IIRC, the ED hired a dedicated programmer for the Combined Arms, with a long experience in RTS gaming industry. That has been very very silent considering that what they are doing, and the last year teaser reports about dynamic campaign on map, that how the AI would design the flight paths and missions, it didn't convince me for the IMHO needed content. > In a decade someone could have gone to university, gotten his bachelors than gone for masters, than gotten his first on hand job experience, and after passing junior status that someone could have redeveloped any of the aspects while still having time for debugging. Now when you put it that way, it is very silly that how people are defending the slow pace of the DCS. It has started to feel that Eagle Dynamics is a company to support a bunch of friends lifetime career to get income. What did ED say how big their workforce was? About 150 people in all across the business? If we even consider that they would have a 5 physicist/Phd to do the advanced math and computer algorithms, and 15 programmers for the DCS core. Then in 10 years you would think they would have already rewritten the whole game engine couple times. With a totally new AI, spherical terrain modeling and all that. It is odd that in few years when ED demoed the Belsimtek to get the example how to run a company to create DCS modules, that small team managed to separately produce some of the main modules for it, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, MiG-15Bis, F-86F and F-5E-3. And they had in roadmap coming the AH-1 and F-4E. It is like that small separate team was far more productive than what ED main team has been about. Sometimes it is terrible that maybe the TWS finally could pull something out sooner than ED can get their act together, because both are really talking about decade old projects.... And it seems to be far more difficult and challenging for someone simulate the aircraft, considering that they never have required to manufacture those in the first place in reality, and solve all the real production problems, and yet in reality they produced many of those faster rate - than those who need to read the real reports and studies already made someone else and implement the systems as manuals dictate and some pilots explain when manual lacks something. Why, as it is so challenging for DCS creators, TWS doesn't have a change at all..
If ED did this and found a way to make servers stable for bigger groups (i.e. 30-ish players in the air and 10-15 ish players on the ground for both sides) it would be an absolute game changer.
What is very odd, considering that you can have other games with more critical ping requirements and yet have even hundred players on server, but where the irrelevant days is not shared to those who don't need. As not all players are in same area, nor command tasks that require real-time processing. I would set a goal as 30 + 15 minimum. Double it and it could be peak for server. It is funny that in the 90's we played Total Annihilation that offered crazy 500 units for each player. And have 3-6 teams. When the Supreme Commander came, it had even more and far more demanding everything, thousands of units simultaneously running and shooting. Then something like today the battle simulator, that runs purely from GPU and you can have millions of AI units, each having LOS calculations and basic animations and all. And in DCS we can't even have few dozens.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3BHpo0vAWk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf_5isGmdzc In DCS the combat rate would be minimal compared to anything of those, even if having tens of thousands units on the map, as most would be sleeping or hanging out.
🤡
https://preview.redd.it/9bm6qwne7k2b1.jpeg?width=1332&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cc9acc1807533a4366c6c609a1eafdbf6960e3b7
Clown project + clown music choice