I assume @wagmatt means trees; ‘triple-canopy jungle’ I think I heard him say once. Does DCS really mean: Dendrology Combat Simulation (yeah, I had to look that up). Just, please, give me the option to use simple, green, leafy things instead. So I can run it in the future.
A SWAG on my part but I see Vukan making things smoother moreso than X3’g the FPS. I want to be wrong. My hope is it will let me ‘ghost’ MSFT, maybe.
But even if they didn’t use triple canopy imagine a map the size of the caucuses with the tree cover of the Marianas map, that would probably bring even the most hardcore pc to its knees and single digits fps
In the Intruder and Phantom trees are trees. But slow stuff like the A-1 and helos, a proper jungle matters or there’s not much point in calling it Vietnam. Also, rice paddies with proper 3D berms. First revisit Guam. It looks nothing like the island. The terrain mesh may be OK but nothing placed on top of it is recognizable.
Other than the BLU-109, maybe mk-84’s, or a full A-6’s load of bombs, do you really blow an actual hole in triple canopy jungle? Honest question. From what I can recall seeing from Vietnam or the PTO, most bombs in the jungle shred a lot of the lower canopy but the tops are rarely knocked out. Sure concentrated bombing, or really big bombs can do it, but most stuff didn’t look like it really cleared out the canopy.
Or are you saying that DCS doesn’t have proper damage modeling through the trees? I hadn’t noticed that, but I also haven’t messed with that much recently.
For a long period of time trees did have a large hitbox that prevented many munitions from getting through. Currently though I haven’t experienced much blockage from trees except for the trunk and the denser foliage, and many a time have even driven my Mossie through the top third of a tree with no consequence.
Yes, it might be a little better now but for example a SAM hidden under trees can be impossible to destroy while the AI has no issue seeing through the trees and engaging targets
At the risk of being labeled as Blasphemous I couldn’t care less. Like, literally.
Gimme the goshdarned South East Asia. FOr me it’s all about the A-6 rides at low Altitude over airfields carved out of the jungle thriple canopy.
It’s about naval operations in high temperature/humidity with worn out Phantoms without guns, or landing at night in terrible monsoon weather.
Yes- I do not care- because as everything else that would be iterative development. Even if it takes years, it’s still fine.
The really missing parts are the flyable A-6, the red jets, the side pieces of the century series fighters… There’s a lot that is more important than the destructible trees.
And still none of that would detract from finally actually having the phooking Viet Nam.
The djungle could be a textured block for all I care. It’s not like you can see the ground through the foliage anyway and target would mostly be in the open.
Edit. Let me expand on that. Yes, targets could also be hidden in the jungle, but you wouldn’t be able to see them, just as in real life. Go in there, drop on coordinates, look for secondaries and go home.
Big targets like SAM sites and runways would be in clearings.
I haven’t tested Afghanistan to be fair but we already had these destructible trees way back when Nevada released. I have not seen them used for dense forests on any map.